SoulMonster Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 About Axl and his early drug use: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 As for Axl's overdose. To me it seems more likely it was a result of stress and suicide rather than drug use out of control. Because he allegedly wasn't using drugs at the time. And from quotes it is clear he was struggling with depression at the time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChildOfTheMoon Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 We need so much an Axl’s autobiography! Imagine how cool it would be to understand his point of view, to know a few stories e clarify others, especially because everyone says he has such a great memory! Also he is so vague in his interviews, I always end up with more questions, so to have someone helping him organize all those memories would be amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussTCB Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 32 minutes ago, ChildOfTheMoon said: We need so much an Axl’s autobiography! Imagine how cool it would be to understand his point of view, to know a few stories e clarify others, especially because everyone says he has such a great memory! Also he is so vague in his interviews, I always end up with more questions, so to have someone helping him organize all those memories would be amazing. I'm glad someone mentioned this. Axl always mentions how he's leery of the press because things get twisted. I cannot see how anyone could twist what he says because he's always so vague IMO. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basic_GnR_Fan Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 6 minutes ago, RussTCB said: I'm glad someone mentioned this. Axl always mentions how he's leery of the press because things get twisted. I cannot see how anyone could twist what he says because he's always so vague IMO. If I had to venture a guess, I think Axl's real beef with the press is the fact that back in the day Slash and Duff weren't as savvy and would just air dirty laundry in the press, so the press got blamed for being the conduit that made it happen. Now, they've learned to master the vague response! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamsapple Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 9 minutes ago, RussTCB said: I'm glad someone mentioned this. Axl always mentions how he's leery of the press because things get twisted. I cannot see how anyone could twist what he says because he's always so vague IMO. I can see Axl's point too though, but it's the interviewers and the questions mostly, everbody looking for some quote to make a good headline somwhere, it's dsgusting. I'd just ask straight answers, let the man talk, let whatever he says sink for a bit and maybe offer a follow up question to clarify instead of just ticking boxes. Unless he's actively promoting a new record or something, anything other than an in depth interview makes no sense with this type of artist. All that pushing just makes him pull back even more and we end up with vague answers to mostly very unteresting questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarpatch Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 (edited) 47 minutes ago, RussTCB said: I'm glad someone mentioned this. Axl always mentions how he's leery of the press because things get twisted. I cannot see how anyone could twist what he says because he's always so vague IMO. There’s what he believes to be truth What others have told him to be truth What former members/management believe to be truth And finally what really happened I think part of this reunion has been a lot of piecing together the past and realizing what may have actually happened at times. He’s prob been so vague because he really can’t say for certain. Only alludes to possibilities Edited October 2, 2019 by guitarpatch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChildOfTheMoon Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 (edited) 31 minutes ago, adamsapple said: I can see Axl's point too though, but it's the interviewers and the questions mostly, everbody looking for some quote to make a good headline somwhere, it's dsgusting. I'd just ask straight answers, let the man talk, let whatever he says sink for a bit and maybe offer a follow up question to clarify instead of just ticking boxes. Unless he's actively promoting a new record or something, anything other than an in depth interview makes no sense with this type of artist. All that pushing just makes him pull back even more and we end up with vague answers to mostly very unteresting questions. I disagree. We’ve had a few great people interviewing him, but his answers were always a mess, because he mixes facts with his thoughts and feelings, gossip that other people told him (usually management) about whatever and there were ALWAYS the stuff that he would tell only half the story because of the 358 lawsuits he was dealing with and he couldn’t speak publicly. Besides, some of the journalists probably were afraid and intimidated of following up his answers with more questions because he could just storm out. The drama with the press was very childish imo. Of course the journalist would ask difficult questions to all of them, but they were very immature about the whole thing. In general they would speak whatever came to their minds and then blame the journalists. If you don’t want any drama with your bandmates, just don’t say private stuff in public, which is what they’re cleverly doing now. The biggest reason GNR fell apart was because they were not capable of having conversations between them about the shit going on and would listen to outside people. Then they decided to use the press to do that and well we all know how it ended. That’s why the conversations the 3 of them had before the reunion must have been so healing. Edited October 2, 2019 by ChildOfTheMoon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post SoulMonster Posted October 2, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 2, 2019 On the contrary, I find Axl's interviews to be the most genuine, revealing and interesting of all band members. Axl was willing to open up, emotionally naked, and talk extensively about whatever topic was brought forward. He has also been largely consistent though put the years. Funny and intelligent. In writing, though, he sometimes become too cryptic and could benefit from simpler syntax. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChildOfTheMoon Posted October 2, 2019 Share Posted October 2, 2019 42 minutes ago, SoulMonster said: On the contrary, I find Axl's interviews to be the most genuine, revealing and interesting of all band members. Axl was willing to open up, emotionally naked, and talk extensively about whatever topic was brought forward. He has also been largely consistent though put the years. Funny and intelligent. In writing, though, he sometimes become too cryptic and could benefit from simpler syntax. Yes, I agree that his intentions are great, he’s honest and open, but I don’t think he expresses himself very well, that’s why I think someone helping him to write an autobiography would be amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azifwekare Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 On 02/10/2019 at 8:35 AM, SoulMonster said: About Axl and his early drug use: That first quote sounds like someone trying to describe a crazy dream they just woke up from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RONIN Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 On 10/1/2019 at 4:22 PM, Blackstar said: As for the other quotes, I think they're very interesting as a snapshot of feelings and mindsets when all that was said, but I don't think they necessarily mean something about the current situation. Same with what Axl had said in public over the years. People change, minds change, feelings change... The feelings of Duff and Slash seemed to have stayed remarkably consistent from ~95-2015 regarding the importance of the structural integrity of the original lineup imho. Needless to say feelings change, money becomes more important when you get older and so on... I've always found the late 90's - early 00's quotes from these guys to be a fascinating time capsule. So much anger, bitterness, and resentment - even from Duff. What exactly went down between Axl, Slash, and Duff from the Live Era album till RIR '01 to create that level of hostility? And then Canter saying Axl was still considering working with Slash on a few CD tracks in the early 00's. There were also so many rumors of one-off reunion gigs around the millennium for major paydays. You have to wonder how close we really came to a reconciliation back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnR Chris Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 (edited) I don't put a ton of stock into what Duff and Slash in early 2000s or following their departure from GNR. Honestly, they have a long history of contradictory statements. It isn't about them not being press savvy. They knew what they were doing. They lied about how they signed over the rights to the band name. They disparaged GNR and Axl in the press while Axl stayed largely quiet and out of the limelight. And it was in an effort to promote themselves and what would become Velvet Revolver. If I'm not mistaken, they both also relapsed in the VR days. But also, when you're butt hurt, you make incendiary remarks. They all have. Time has a way of healing wounds. So Duff can say in 2002 that he doesn't consider what Axl was doing as "Guns N' Roses" and he can still play Chinese Democracy songs today without being a hypocrite. Times and opinions change. I'm so glad they all patched things up. Some fans wanna whine about a money grab, but it's been a dream come true to be able to see Axl, Slash and Duff share the same stage. I never thought I'd see that day. One final thing: I have found through the year's that Axl's account of the disintegration of the band has been more accurate than what others have said. There clearly was a power struggle between Slash and Axl in the middle '90s in regards to what the next record was supposed to sound like. Axl wasn't the only one to reject the Snakepit material. Duff did too. Edited October 3, 2019 by GnR Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shotsfired cro Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 18 minutes ago, GnR Chris said: I don't put a ton of stock into what Duff and Slash in early 2000s or following their departure from GNR. Honestly, they have a long history of contradictory statements. It isn't about them not being press savvy. They knew what they were doing. They lied about how they signed over the rights to the band name. They disparaged GNR and Axl in the press while Axl stayed largely quiet and out of the limelight. And it was in an effort to promote themselves and what would become Velvet Revolver. If I'm not mistaken, they both also relapsed in the VR days. But also, when you're butt hurt, you make incendiary remarks. They all have. Time has a way of healing wounds. So Duff can say in 2002 that he doesn't consider what Axl was doing as "Guns N' Roses" and he can still play Chinese Democracy songs today without being a hypocrite. Times and opinions change. I'm so glad they things upey all patched. Some fans wanna whine about a money grab, but it's been a dream come true to be able to see Axl, Slash and Duff share the same stage. I never thought I'd see that day. One final thing: I have found through the year's that Axl's account of the disintegration of the band has been more accurate than what others have said. There clearly was a power struggle between Slash and Axl in the middle '90s in regards to what the next record was supposed to sound like. Axl wasn't the only one to reject the Snakepit material. Duff did too. oh yeah? so what is the real truth then?? No, not all. Just Slash, Duff and Ax. Some members, Iz, Matt and Adler who were vital parts to AFD + UYI's are missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackstar Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 14 minutes ago, RONIN said: The feelings of Duff and Slash seemed to have stayed remarkably consistent from ~95-2015 regarding the importance of the structural integrity of the original lineup imho. Needless to say feelings change, money becomes more important when you get older and so on... I've always found the late 90's - early 00's quotes from these guys to be a fascinating time capsule. So much anger, bitterness, and resentment - even from Duff. What exactly went down between Axl, Slash, and Duff from the Live Era album till RIR '01 to create that level of hostility? And then Canter saying Axl was still considering working with Slash on a few CD tracks in the early 00's. There were also so many rumors of one-off reunion gigs around the millennium for major paydays. You have to wonder how close we really came to a reconciliation back then. I think Slash changed his tune slightly through the years. First he emphasised in musical differences, then he said it wasn't the reason of the split. He was more "accommodating" in interviews around the time he visited Axl's house compared to the early VR days, and so on. The late 90s-early 00s bitterness probably had to do with that they really weren't expecting that Axl would continue on his own and wouldn't call them back; plus, Axl had started talking again and telling his side for the first time (also expressing resentment on his part). But despite of what Slash said during that period, he also sounded like he would go back to GnR if he got the call. Have you read the (relatively) recent Merck interview? http://www.a-4-d.com/t3843-2019-04-26-music-week-ex-guns-n-roses-manager-merck-mercuriadis-talks-slash-axl-s-reunion It seems like each side was expecting the other to take the first step. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RONIN Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 52 minutes ago, Blackstar said: I think Slash changed his tune slightly through the years. First he emphasised in musical differences, then he said it wasn't the reason of the split. He was more "accommodating" in interviews around the time he visited Axl's house compared to the early VR days, and so on. The late 90s-early 00s bitterness probably had to do with that they really weren't expecting that Axl would continue on his own and wouldn't call them back; plus, Axl had started talking again and telling his side for the first time (also expressing resentment on his part). But despite of what Slash said during that period, he also sounded like he would go back to GnR if he got the call. Have you read the (relatively) recent Merck interview? http://www.a-4-d.com/t3843-2019-04-26-music-week-ex-guns-n-roses-manager-merck-mercuriadis-talks-slash-axl-s-reunion It seems like each side was expecting the other to take the first step. Thanks for sharing that. As we all suspected, bruised egos between the principals which led to missed opportunities. 2002-2006 would have been a fantastic time to reunite had Axl put out his album in '99 or 2000. Agreed on Slash, if you look at his old interviews between 2000 (once that 2nd snakepit album went nowhere) to right before VR, he leaves the door open for a return to GnR. Do you think Velvet Revolver affected the trajectory of the reunion? 2002-2005 was a major low point for Axl and Nu Guns... What could have been... 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarpatch Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 (edited) 39 minutes ago, RONIN said: Thanks for sharing that. As we all suspected, bruised egos between the principals which led to missed opportunities. 2002-2006 would have been a fantastic time to reunite had Axl put out his album in '99 or 2000. Agreed on Slash, if you look at his old interviews between 2000 (once that 2nd snakepit album went nowhere) to right before VR, he leaves the door open for a return to GnR. Do you think Velvet Revolver affected the trajectory of the reunion? 2002-2005 was a major low point for Axl and Nu Guns... What could have been... I think the failed 02 tour completely derailed Axl on top of the thought of pretty much re-recording the album. There was too much to prove and too much to sift through to entertain it on anything but his own terms. He wasn’t crawling back Edited October 4, 2019 by guitarpatch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnR Chris Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 2 hours ago, shotsfired cro said: oh yeah? so what is the real truth then?? No, not all. Just Slash, Duff and Ax. Some members, Iz, Matt and Adler who were vital parts to AFD + UYI's are missing. They claimed they were in effect held hostage right before a show with Axl threatening not to go on if they didn't sign over the rights to the band name. They said they did so under distress and threat that fans would riot if Axl didn't take the stage. All of that is false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RONIN Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 5 minutes ago, GnR Chris said: They claimed they were in effect held hostage right before a show with Axl threatening not to go on if they didn't sign over the rights to the band name. They said they did so under distress and threat that fans would riot if Axl didn't take the stage. All of that is false. Not necessarily so black and white I think. I believe the narrative since Duff's book is that this was a power move from Axl that was carried out by Doug Goldstein. Maybe Axl did not know all of the details or how Doug was going to do it, but essentially he looked the other way when it happened and reaped the benefits after the deed was done. That's my impression from the interviews/books we have available on the topic. The discrepancy really is over when this happened. During the Illusion tour or earlier. There's a Niven interview from a decade or so back where he mentions how he believes the rights to the name may have been legally transferred over to Axl during the geffen renegotiation in '91 (buried in the fine print) as one of Doug Goldstein's first acts as manager. If this is correct, that would line up with those Slash interviews from 95/96' where he sounds blindsided about the legal ownership of the band's name and that his lawyers were looking into the details. That also lines up with Axl's version where he says that it wasn't a big deal to Slash and that he was okay with it (in '91) but began to express resentment over the issue after the embarrassment he felt from his inner circle that he had no control over the name as the band was starting to fall apart in the mid 90's. I think Niven's account of events makes more sense though that doesn't necessarily discount the other version. Izzy, Duff, and Slash tell the same story of Axl becoming obsessed with drawing up legal documents for the band in the 90's so it's entirely plausible for Sluff to have been victims of legal shenanigans from Doug on the Illusion tour. Likely it was over something else and not the GnR name transfer though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sydney Fan Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 1 hour ago, RONIN said: Thanks for sharing that. As we all suspected, bruised egos between the principals which led to missed opportunities. 2002-2006 would have been a fantastic time to reunite had Axl put out his album in '99 or 2000. Agreed on Slash, if you look at his old interviews between 2000 (once that 2nd snakepit album went nowhere) to right before VR, he leaves the door open for a return to GnR. Do you think Velvet Revolver affected the trajectory of the reunion? 2002-2005 was a major low point for Axl and Nu Guns... What could have been... Im not sure....... I think for axl he woukd have been doing it more for the money than from the heart. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RONIN Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 That excerpt from Duff's book: On July 5, 1993, we all rendezvoused in Barcelona for a huge outdoor show at the Olympic Stadium. Axl came in from Venice. I returned from a visit with Linda to the Spanish island of Ibiza. Slash was already in Barcelona. After Suicidal Tendencies and Brian May had played their opening sets, our manager, Doug Goldstein, sent an oddly formal request to see me and Slash before the show. This was unusual. When Slash and I arrived at the vibe room, one of the tour managers was sitting there waiting for us. The guy was clutching some papers. He put a slim stack of pages down in front of each of us. I leafed through it. It was a legal document giving Axl the right to continue to play as Guns N’ Roses even if either Slash or I—or both of us—were not part of it. Though it didn’t affect our status as shareholders in the operation, Axl and Axl alone would control the name if we signed this agreement. “What the fuck?” I said. “Look, man,” the tour manager said. “The truth is, you guys are not in good shape—you know that yourselves. If one of you dies, nobody wants to have to spend years in court battling your families or whatever.” That was not what it said, however. There was nothing about death in these documents. With the crowd outside already getting rowdy, the guy then implied Axl wouldn’t go onstage that night unless we signed the documents. I pictured people getting hurt if a riot started—at least that was my fear. And I was so fucking exhausted—it felt as I though I’d been dragging a house around behind me for the last two years. Besides, at the time I never thought GN’R could possibly exist without us. The idea seemed ridiculous. And in that case, maybe the documents didn’t need to be fixed? Fuck it. I signed. So did Slash. Guns N’ Roses—the trademark now owned by Axl—took the stage. The next day, I grabbed Doug Goldstein on the tarmac at the airport. I had woken up really upset about what had happened the previous night. Slash and I shouldn’t have signed those papers. But management wouldn’t let the whole thing go forward anyway. Right? I shouted at Doug, saying he needed to fix things. “Look, Duff,” he said, “you’re a smart guy. I manage Guns N’ Roses.” “Yeah, I know, Doug. And that’s why we have to—” . “No, you’re not getting it. I manage Guns N’ Roses.” “Are you trying to tell me you manage the name Guns N’ Roses?” I was still a member of the band. Not a paid hand. Slash and I still had the same equity stake as before. We had just relinquished control of the name. Doug looked at me with no expression. “You manage the guy who owns the name Guns N’ Roses—is that where you’re going, Doug?” He shrugged. That was where he was going. I was apoplectic with rage. I couldn’t even speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sydney Fan Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 Getting back to ronins post, it would have been interesting had axl released the 2000 intentions album the same time contraband came out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackstar Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 17 minutes ago, RONIN said: Not necessarily so black and white I think. I believe the narrative since Duff's book is that this was a power move from Axl that was carried out by Doug Goldstein. Maybe Axl did not know all of the details or how Doug was going to do it, but essentially he looked the other way when it happened and reaped the benefits after the deed was done. That's my impression from the interviews/books we have available on the topic. The discrepancy really is over when this happened. During the Illusion tour or earlier. There's a Niven interview from a decade or so back where he mentions how he believes the rights to the name may have been legally transferred over to Axl during the geffen renegotiation in '91 (buried in the fine print) as one of Doug Goldstein's first acts as manager. If this is correct, that would line up with those Slash interviews from 95/96' where he sounds blindsided about the legal ownership of the band's name and that his lawyers were looking into the details. That also lines up with Axl's version where he says that it wasn't a big deal to Slash and that he was okay with it (in '91) but began to express resentment over the issue after the embarrassment he felt from his inner circle that he had no control over the name as the band was starting to fall apart in the mid 90's. I think Niven's account of events makes more sense though that doesn't necessarily discount the other version. Izzy, Duff, and Slash tell the same story of Axl becoming obsessed with drawing up legal documents for the band in the 90's so it's entirely plausible for Sluff to have been victims of legal shenanigans from Doug on the Illusion tour. Likely it was over something else and not the GnR name transfer though. The problem with Niven's version is that the recording agreement with Geffen was signed later than that, in September 1992, same as the partnership agreement which contained the name clause - the two contracts were interrelated. Of course it's possible that the name clause was added at a later time, as it seems to have been typed over in the draft of the partnership agreement that has become publicly available. I have a Duff interview with a Spanish magazine in 1993 (in Spanish - not translated into English yet), right after that show in Barcelona where he said he and Slash were made to sign the document. He comes across as totally hammered in that interview, and he was repeatedly asking the interviewer to connect him with a "trusted" person in Madrid (the interviewer assumed it was for buying coke). That period was Duff's lowest point as far as his alcohol and other use goes. And this makes me doubt that he would have been able to read a legal document and understand the consequences in the state he was in, let alone remember the circumstances - but I can't rule it out, of course. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackstar Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 36 minutes ago, Sydney Fan said: Im not sure....... I think for axl he woukd have been doing it more for the money than from the heart. Why? Axl is not known for doing something for the money as primary motivation. He has done things for control and power, but not money. Even Izzy has said that Axl is not about money. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post MildlyArtistic Posted October 4, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 4, 2019 Just now, Blackstar said: Why? Axl is not known for doing something for the money as primary motivation. He has done things for control and power, but not money. Even Izzy has said that Axl is not about money. Could've fooled me with how the last 3 years have gone 3 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts