Jump to content
lame ass security

Guns N' Roses featured on Breaking The Band

Recommended Posts

On 6/13/2019 at 2:01 PM, Blackstar said:

A clip:

https://content.jwplatform.com/videos/jIgrLFUD-640.mp4

Mick Wall (oh well) and Alan Niven are interviewed.

Well, it wasn't too bad.  The part where Slash was running naked through the golf course was hilarious.  I had always envisioned that happening at night but they portrayed it happening during the day.  The look on the actor's face, playing a stunned golfer seeing Slash in all his glory, was really funny.  Niven said that he thought "Axl pissed away his prime."  I don't know if I was aware that Niven had a couple cops go to Axl's apartment and quasi arrest him, they actually put him in handcuffs, to get him to the LA Coliseum for the first Stones show in '89.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I thought it was a fun entertaining way to pass the hour. Loved that Gilby was on it. :thumbsup:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lame ass security said:

Well, it wasn't too bad.  The part where Slash was running naked through the golf course was hilarious.  I had always envisioned that happening at night but they portrayed it happening during the day.  The look on the actor's face, playing a stunned golfer seeing Slash in all his glory, was really funny.  Niven said that he thought "Axl pissed away his prime." 

I guess that since Niven and Mick Wall were, as it seems, the biggest contributors to the script, the story was told from their point of view. But yeah, from the descriptions I've read, these dramatized scenes must have been entertaining to watch. And also I find the idea of the psychiatrists talking about Axl's and Slash's relationship hilarious :lol:

4 hours ago, lame ass security said:

I don't know if I was aware that Niven had a couple cops go to Axl's apartment and quasi arrest him, they actually put him in handcuffs, to get him to the LA Coliseum for the first Stones show in '89.

Yeah, Niven has told this story before. He said he had told the cops to handcuff Axl if necessary, but I don't think they actually did.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blackstar said:

I guess that since Niven and Mick Wall were, as it seems, the biggest contributors to the script, the story was told from their point of view. But yeah, from the descriptions I've read, these dramatized scenes must have been entertaining to watch. And also I find the idea of the psychiatrists talking about Axl's and Slash's relationship hilarious :lol:

Yeah, Niven has told this story before. He said he had told the cops to handcuff Axl if necessary, but I don't think they actually did.  

The reenactment had them cuff Axl and put him in the back of the squad car along with Erin Everly. But like you said, they probably took poetic license and embellished it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except for the reunion part it was basically a bash Axl documentary.  I'm sure he wouldn't like it if he watched it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, gnfnrs1972 said:

Except for the reunion part it was basically a bash Axl documentary.  I'm sure he wouldn't like it if he watched it. 

 

Yeah, interestingly enough the only persons interviewed for this 'documentary' just happened to have motivation for an axe to grind with AXL. Niven and Gilby were both fired and, well, we all know the story on Mick Wall. He's prominently mentioned in a song for pete's sake!

Not saying that any or all are lying per se, but I kinda took what they had to say with a grain of salt. IMO, Niven has a ton more credibility than Mick Wall -- as he was actually around the band a ton in the early days. But I believe a lot of Mick Wall's accounts are not from the 1st person and are things we as fans heard around the rumor mill.

But as I said, both Niven and Gilby were fired by WAR so I'm not sure they qualify as completely objective. Also, not sure the way they depicted SLASH and DUFF signing the legal papers AXL wanted them to is 100% accurate. As AXL himself has made mention many times, SLASH and DUFF were out of it most days back then and AXL felt he was protecting the brand name. Their collective memories of what went on aren't very reliable. I believe SLASH has somewhat admitted to that which is part of the reason he and AXL mended fences.

Lastly, I noticed a common thread among all the 'Breaking the Band' episodes I watched. They definitely liked to place blame.

Edited by thunderram
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, gnfnrs1972 said:

Except for the reunion part it was basically a bash Axl documentary.  I'm sure he wouldn't like it if he watched it. 

Yeah, I got to watch it, and this pretty much summarizes it. 

I think Alan Niven's comment about Axl pissing away his prime was actually one of the least harsh ones in the documentary - and not really inaccurate.

15 hours ago, thunderram said:

Also, not sure the way they depicted SLASH and DUFF signing the legal papers AXL wanted them to is 100% accurate. As AXL himself has made mention many times, SLASH and DUFF were out of it most days back then and AXL felt he was protecting the brand name. Their collective memories of what went on aren't very reliable. 

Yes, there have been different versions about the circumstances under which it happened, and the documentary presented one of them.

15 hours ago, thunderram said:

Lastly, I noticed a common thread among all the 'Breaking the Band' episodes I watched. They definitely liked to place blame.

I watched some of the other episodes and I thought the GnR episode was the poorest one. At least in the other ones there were more people interviewed. There was surely a lot of stuff edited out from the interviews, especially from the Marc Canter one. Marc didn't get much air time.

------------

I also didn't find the dramatizations particularly entertaining - maybe it's because some of them were spoiled for me :lol:. The reenactment of the hell tour was total cringe. 

I noticed that the narration avoided mentioning Doug Goldstein's name - they referred to him twice as the "tour manager" (who then became manager). 

And, of course, they totally forgot Dizzy :lol:

-----------

Imo the best GnR documentary, in comparison, was the 2016 BBC one. At least it had some unseen before footage from Marc Canter's archive and a couple of stories that we hadn't heard before.

Edited by Blackstar
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2019 at 9:56 AM, Tom-Ass said:

What the hell is reelz tv?

It's a cable channel. I used to have it, but Frontier cable took it off. Spectrum cable has this channel. They show alot of crime shows too.

21 hours ago, gnfnrs1972 said:

Except for the reunion part it was basically a bash Axl documentary.  I'm sure he wouldn't like it if he watched it. 

Yeah, anytime there is a show about GNR, Axl is never there for the interview and it's always is fault no matter what happened to the band or the members.

I think Axl just doesn't give a shit what they say.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Blackstar said:

Yes, there have been different versions about the circumstances under which it happened, and the documentary presented one of them.

That's my issue with it. Presenting one version w/o also calling out that the particular account is heavily disputed or at least mentioning some of the other versions is disingenuous IMO. It's certainly a poor way to report a story.

 

12 hours ago, Blackstar said:

I watched some of the other episodes and I thought the GnR episode was the poorest one. At least in the other ones there were more people interviewed. There was surely a lot of stuff edited out from the interviews, especially from the Marc Canter one. Marc didn't get much air time.

 

Totally agree. Good call out on Canter. I forgot he appeared a few times.

Most the other GN'R documentaries I've seen had a fair amount of archival interview footage from Vicki Hamilton and Tom Zutaut. IMO, it's kinda hard to paint a complete picture of the band back in those days w/o them. 

Having Alan Niven is more than valid. It would have been appropriate to have Doug Goldstein and Vicki's input too, though, since they also managed the band before the breakup.

I get having a media member such as Mick Wall to offer another POV, but I just feel there were better options than one known to have an axe to grind. Maybe someone like Kurt Loder could have been better?

IMO, to do a GN'R documentary justice (outside of interviewing actual band members), you've gotta have as much input as possible from Vicki Hamilton, Tom Zutaut, Mark Canter, Alan Niven, Doug Goldstein and probably even Mike Clink.

 

12 hours ago, Blackstar said:

I also didn't find the dramatizations particularly entertaining - maybe it's because some of them were spoiled for me :lol:. The reenactment of the hell tour was total cringe. 

I noticed that the narration avoided mentioning Doug Goldstein's name - they referred to him twice as the "tour manager" (who then became manager).

 

100% agree as well.

 

12 hours ago, Blackstar said:

Imo the best GnR documentary, in comparison, was the 2016 BBC one. At least it had some unseen before footage from Marc Canter's archive and a couple of stories that we hadn't heard before.

 

I believe I've seen that one, but I can't be sure. IIRC, the A&E one that aired on the BIO channel wasn't too bad.

Edited by thunderram
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Blackstar said:

------

Imo the best GnR documentary, in comparison, was the 2016 BBC one. At least it had some unseen before footage from Marc Canter's archive and a couple of stories that we hadn't heard before.

I really liked that one. It's not on YouTube anymore unfortunately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean it was done by the Reelz channel....I took it with a grain of salt and thought it was an entertaining hour and not at all to be meant taken literally as 100% truth.

But hey that's just me. :D

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skipped through one of their episodes on YouTube to get a reference point on the show. Doubtful if I'm gonna tune in for the upcoming ones. Those re-enactment scenes seem really unnecessary in here; it sort of felt like watching an old episode of Unsolved Mysteries 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First time in a doc I’ve seen Axl’s early issues diagnosed from how he was brought up and abuse he dealt with leading to him dealing with his problems in a similar way where as Slash had a better upbringing which led to him not seeing things the same. 

It was fun, I’m still not buying the Axl forced them to sign the name to him. I think it’s clear that he would have lost that lawsuit if that were the case. I think there was a contract Axl wanted worked out where if Slash or Duff died or quit then he’d be able to continue on with the name. But I think it’s always portrayed as Axl leveraging going on stage for them to sign. 

Maybe 300 people will watch it so it doesn’t matter but it was entertaining 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The re-enactments were fun to see. Never knew that Axl and Erin had to be brought in handcuffs by police to the first Stones show. The Izzy and Duff actors looked and sounded nothing like the real guys. Everyone else seemed pretty close, tho. Who was Erin’s actress? She wasn’t credited, I noticed.

i feel like some of the content was a little too random. Like it had nothing to do with the breakup and didn’t need to be there. Conversely, I feel like shit was missing. For instance, why talk about Izzy pissing in an elevator and Duff’s pancreas bursting, but NOT talk about Slash “dying” in an elevator?

also, you can tell whoever put this together just pulled info from the band’s Wikipedia page, without really double-checking everything. Paul’s last name being mispronounced was a big indicator of this imo.

lastly, I thought the narrator’s voice was really annoying, and then I saw during the ending credits that it was Dee Snider, and now it all makes sense.

Edited by rocknroll41
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had seen the Van Halen one a while back and it was awful, so I'm expecting this to be the same. Bad acting and twisting of information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Gibbo said:

Anyone else have issues watching that? I got about 7 minutes in and now it is just hung buffering. restarted it and it is even worse. Either way I think people around here are too hard on this kind of thing. I was enjoying it and can't wait to see the rest.  Sure it can be a bit cheesy with the re-enactments and would be better with proper Guns tunes playing but it is still cool for what it is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

alright, they lost me for a quick second with the psychiatrist commentary.. totally not needed lol

Edited by Tom-Ass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tom-Ass said:

alright, they lost me for a quick second with the psychiatrist commentary.. totally not needed lol

I know what you mean but she's really cute.😊  Her name is Dr. Linda Papadopoulos, she's on all the episodes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×