Tadsy Posted June 10, 2015 Author Share Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) No disrespect to the OP or those discussing the topic, but I've never been concerned with what Axl's up to in his personal life. I'm a fan of his music and performances, so unless he's releasing music or performing somewhere near me, I couldn't care less what he's up to. None taken, I get that some people couldn't care less what he does day to day. I'm just curious as to if he's been spotted recently (as in 2015) I actually just find it intriguing he goes "missing" for long stretches, I also get there's been multiple threads on this before so sorry for rehashing lol He could be sitting on a beach somewhere getting sucked off by a couple of hot blondes and enjoying life rather than the built up idea of him sitting in a dark room of his house depressed about shit that we all kind of think happens... Again it's just intriguing Edited June 10, 2015 by Tadsy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shjtjustgotreal Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 he's staying at my house Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSoftie Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 If you take a look at the other 2015 Axl pictures thread someone posted a picture supposedly from December 2014. Looks believable too, looks like 2014's aging but slimmer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magisme Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Less Bloated!!! I'm pretty sure we haven't seen anything since Vegas. Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought December 2014 photos were shown to be from earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerage5 Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Less Bloated!!! I'm pretty sure we haven't seen anything since Vegas. Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought December 2014 photos were shown to be from earlier.Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSoftie Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 They were? Link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 This guy was thin but same ginger Irish stock, the nose was close similar facial structure. But he looked more like a guitar player not Kenny Powers drunker cousin.Do you like to post random things or you post things so you could be the person who has posted the most in this forum?Random? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtle Signs Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) Probably not or we would have had a bunch of mostly grown ass men critiquing and criticizing another grown ass man's (Axl) appearance. Mind you half of these people probably wouldn't post their own pictures though. I'm in the Russ camp. I care about the music,not what Axl wears or looks like. Nobody else should care either unless you are trying to fuck him or you are an easily impressionable kid who wants to copy his style. Edited June 10, 2015 by Subtle Signs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Probably not or we would have had a bunch of mostly grown ass men critiquing and criticizing another grown ass man's (Axl) appearance. Mind you half of these people probably wouldn't post their own pictures though. I'm in the Russ camp. I care about the music,not what Axl wears or looks like. Nobody else should care either unless you are trying to fuck him or you are an easily impressionable kid who wants to copy his style.A noble stance but you would be a fool to pretend that image and image creation and projection was not part of Guns N' Roses's original success story. Axl and Slash were really pop stars - the bandana, the top hat, the expensive videos. They deliberately manufactured this image and placed it on screen via MTV for all to see, and capitalised immensely from it. Having created it, they cannot very well bottle it up again and slip back into anonymity so long as society has an obsession with 'celebrity'.I suppose the point I am trying to make is, GN'R were never anonymous guys like Floyd, or deliberately (speaking aesthetically) low key - even grungy - rockets like Dylan and Neil Young. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crowebar Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Axl's probably a super stealthy and low-key, in disguise, type of jet-setter. He's probably in 'rehab' somewhere, getting a few, ahem, tune-ups... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrPoe Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 This is from early May in SoCal.Fuck...walked right past him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinyrobot Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 In 2001 Axl went to China and stayed there for 3 months or so..... Did any of you know?Nope.Calling him reclusive just because you don't see him around your corner only shows some people can't not even imagine what the life of a celebrity is.When we got to see pics of him in the streets of London or whatever is because he actually was on tour. He has no need to hit the streets, he's not like us. He's got servants who do the groceries and everything the mortals have to do on their own.He must not even wipe his own' ass. Must have a robot or something. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomfriend Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 If Axl had an ass-wiping robot, Bucket would have never left the band. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinyrobot Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 If Axl had an ass-wiping robot, Bucket would have never left the band.there's a video made by some hot dutch or german girl who went to Axl's house and she shows his bathroom.The toilett has some computer-like thing and it looks like the chair of a spaceshift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liers Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I was talking to Axl yesterday. He bought the house next door to me. He invited me over for a few beers and some hamburgers and hot dogs on the grill. He gained a little weight and grew a beard. His hairs gone white. He had a red jacket on too which was strange because it was so hot out....Wait... Maybe he said his name was Santa.... Not sure, I was pretty drunk... Might've been Steve actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSoftie Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 It's not that strange that we want Axl to look good. I mean he looked like a fucking boss in 2006, why wouldn't we want that again? Not too mention he's man in his mid 50s now, if he's taking care of his health (weight) that's a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyVinyard Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Axl's looks matter. When Axl looks like shit, he always seems to sound like it too. Also when he looks like shit, he always seems to have less energy, less charisma, less stage presence and an overall lack of confidence. When he looks like shit, I'm sure he feels like shit. You would think that in itself would be motivation for him to get off the prescription pills and get his ass back in shape and fix that hair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinyrobot Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Axl needs to hang out more with Duff and less with fatty Beta.Duff knows how to become a hot ass in your 50's after looking like shit in your 30's. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Dude Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) Probably not or we would have had a bunch of mostly grown ass men critiquing and criticizing another grown ass man's (Axl) appearance. Mind you half of these people probably wouldn't post their own pictures though. I'm in the Russ camp. I care about the music,not what Axl wears or looks like. Nobody else should care either unless you are trying to fuck him or you are an easily impressionable kid who wants to copy his style.A noble stance but you would be a fool to pretend that image and image creation and projection was not part of Guns N' Roses's original success story. Axl and Slash were really pop stars - the bandana, the top hat, the expensive videos. They deliberately manufactured this image and placed it on screen via MTV for all to see, and capitalised immensely from it. Having created it, they cannot very well bottle it up again and slip back into anonymity so long as society has an obsession with 'celebrity'.I suppose the point I am trying to make is, GN'R were never anonymous guys like Floyd, or deliberately (speaking aesthetically) low key - even grungy - rockets like Dylan and Neil Young. I don't know that Dylan or Young have ever been faceless like Floyd. I'd say they've tended toward reclusivity in their private lives, but they've always been fairly recognizable figures. Point taken though. Edited June 11, 2015 by Mr. Dude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Probably not or we would have had a bunch of mostly grown ass men critiquing and criticizing another grown ass man's (Axl) appearance. Mind you half of these people probably wouldn't post their own pictures though. I'm in the Russ camp. I care about the music,not what Axl wears or looks like. Nobody else should care either unless you are trying to fuck him or you are an easily impressionable kid who wants to copy his style.A noble stance but you would be a fool to pretend that image and image creation and projection was not part of Guns N' Roses's original success story. Axl and Slash were really pop stars - the bandana, the top hat, the expensive videos. They deliberately manufactured this image and placed it on screen via MTV for all to see, and capitalised immensely from it. Having created it, they cannot very well bottle it up again and slip back into anonymity so long as society has an obsession with 'celebrity'.I suppose the point I am trying to make is, GN'R were never anonymous guys like Floyd, or deliberately (speaking aesthetically) low key - even grungy - rockets like Dylan and Neil Young. I don't know that Dylan or Young have ever been faceless like Floyd. I'd say they've tended toward reclusivity in their private lives, but they've always been fairly recognizable figures. Point taken though.Both Dylan and Young deliberately eschewed commercialism at various points in their career. Young was embarrassed when Heart of Gold went to number one. In contrast Guns unshamelessly utilised the media of singles and music promos to attain commercial success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Dude Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Probably not or we would have had a bunch of mostly grown ass men critiquing and criticizing another grown ass man's (Axl) appearance. Mind you half of these people probably wouldn't post their own pictures though. I'm in the Russ camp. I care about the music,not what Axl wears or looks like. Nobody else should care either unless you are trying to fuck him or you are an easily impressionable kid who wants to copy his style.A noble stance but you would be a fool to pretend that image and image creation and projection was not part of Guns N' Roses's original success story. Axl and Slash were really pop stars - the bandana, the top hat, the expensive videos. They deliberately manufactured this image and placed it on screen via MTV for all to see, and capitalised immensely from it. Having created it, they cannot very well bottle it up again and slip back into anonymity so long as society has an obsession with 'celebrity'.I suppose the point I am trying to make is, GN'R were never anonymous guys like Floyd, or deliberately (speaking aesthetically) low key - even grungy - rockets like Dylan and Neil Young. I don't know that Dylan or Young have ever been faceless like Floyd. I'd say they've tended toward reclusivity in their private lives, but they've always been fairly recognizable figures. Point taken though.Both Dylan and Young deliberately eschewed commercialism at various points in their career. Young was embarrassed when Heart of Gold went to number one. In contrast Guns unshamelessly utilised the media of singles and music promos to attain commercial success.Different strokes for different folks.Different strokes for different folks. They're different kinds of artists. There is a place for both. The Stones are as much based on image as any band to ever exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Probably not or we would have had a bunch of mostly grown ass men critiquing and criticizing another grown ass man's (Axl) appearance. Mind you half of these people probably wouldn't post their own pictures though. I'm in the Russ camp. I care about the music,not what Axl wears or looks like. Nobody else should care either unless you are trying to fuck him or you are an easily impressionable kid who wants to copy his style.A noble stance but you would be a fool to pretend that image and image creation and projection was not part of Guns N' Roses's original success story. Axl and Slash were really pop stars - the bandana, the top hat, the expensive videos. They deliberately manufactured this image and placed it on screen via MTV for all to see, and capitalised immensely from it. Having created it, they cannot very well bottle it up again and slip back into anonymity so long as society has an obsession with 'celebrity'.I suppose the point I am trying to make is, GN'R were never anonymous guys like Floyd, or deliberately (speaking aesthetically) low key - even grungy - rockets like Dylan and Neil Young. I don't know that Dylan or Young have ever been faceless like Floyd. I'd say they've tended toward reclusivity in their private lives, but they've always been fairly recognizable figures. Point taken though.Both Dylan and Young deliberately eschewed commercialism at various points in their career. Young was embarrassed when Heart of Gold went to number one. In contrast Guns unshamelessly utilised the media of singles and music promos to attain commercial success.Different strokes for different folks.Different strokes for different folks. They're different kinds of artists. There is a place for both. The Stones are as much based on image as any band to ever exist.What are we arguing about here though? I am not criticising Axl and Slash for being tarty 'pop stars'; I am criticising fans who suddenly insist 'it should be all about the music, or you are gay'' now that image has turned into a 'fat and old' image. If it was 'all about the music' in the beginning there would never have been a top hat or a bandana or a snake dace. Have you ever tried to play a guitar in Slash's posture, low slung, leg's akimbo? It is totally impractical. Slash adopts that pose to 'look cool' basically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 They are called shows for a reason. I felt it was organic with GNR like each member was doing there own thing. They didn't have meetings like "Slash you have give it more legs akimbo"But Axl did complain Izzy wasn't doing enough on stage. That was probably about something else though. Tit for tat type thing. I'm late but you don't do shit on stage the whole show is left on me. They label just gave them huge video budgets in the MTV era. What did we think was going to happen?It's funny as soon as the red carpet isn't there they aren't doing huge videos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 They are called shows for a reason. I felt it was organic with GNR like each member was doing there own thing. They didn't have meetings like "Slash you have give it more legs akimbo"But Axl did complain Izzy wasn't doing enough on stage. That was probably about something else though. Tit for tat type thing. I'm late but you don't do shit on stage the whole show is left on me.They label just gave them huge video budgets in the MTV era. What did we think was going to happen?It's funny as soon as the red carpet isn't there they aren't doing huge videos.'Organic' my arse. Is there a practical benefit for wearing a big gigantic top hat? I imagine it is rather heavy and uncomfortable to wear. Slash just wears it, to look cool basically. Same with Axl and the bandana - and later, multiple costumes. Axl and Slash consciously strove to craft distinct personae. Slash would give you this lead guitarist bollocks about ''just doing my thing man'' but he is actually a lot more canny than he makes out.They could have did exactly what Metallica did c. 1983-88 and vetoed video promos entirely (by the way, I am not exactly advocating this but merely raising its potentiality). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandallFlagg Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Leg's Akimbo from the league of gentleman, ollie plimsols is a legend!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts