downzy

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania August 18, 2023 PNC Park

So that's why tickets haven't been selling well for the Pittsburgh show! Sorry, we were asleep at the wheel. We’ll get on it now.

The hours left in a day after a two hour band meeting. The number and/or age of the groupies he expects backstage after the show. The number of times he’s seen @Black Sabbath standing at the rail. The temperature Axl expects his backstage room (Axl has graduated to the metric system).

Maybe they’re counting its possible live performance in Hershey tonight?

I mean, the day isn’t over yet.

Difference now is Guns isn’t Slash’s primary vehicle for releasing new music and creative output. He likely enjoys GnR for what it is: playing live, pleasing fans, and paying for Perla’s lifestyle.

Because if this band is known for anything, it's definitely for learning from their mistakes.

I figured there might be an issue since August 11th isn't a Tuesday.

I don't think we needed seven years to know that the initial reunion was about money. Not entirely money, but there's little doubt it was the main motivator for at least the first year. That said, I think they would have made enough by this point if it was just about money. I don't think they'd keep it going for seven years if they hated each other. Whatever issues they had they were able to overcome. Seems like they enjoy it, and the boatloads of cash they rake in every show doesn't hurt either.

Please keep responses directed to the topic at hand. Warnings have been sent to members privately. Failure to comply will result in warning points and suspensions. Thanks!

Hid the last two posts. Let’s get back on track with discussion limited to the release of a new Guns N’ Roses song. Thanks!

No where did I say that Rogan doesn't have a right to say what I want. He's free to spout whatever nonsense that comes to his thickheaded skull. But I'm also free to criticize him. Or should I not? Should I not have the right to say that he's not being a responsible broadcaster by allowing his platform to be used by deranged individuals or even his own factually wrong information? Being responsible for what you say means you own any criticism against you. Rogan owns the criticism since he does spout nonsense and he does have such a huge following. What he says matters. You can argue that it shouldn't, but we live in a world where it does. If he chooses to remain reckless and promote conspiracy theories and have truly terrible people on his show, then the shit that gets rained down on him is also his choice. So in your world, the artist is his or he art. There is no separation of the two. According to you, any art that contains controversial topics or language is also art that endorses those issues. It is just absurd that you feel that Rogan spouting conspiracies about Jan 6th or promoting nonsense pseudo-science around vaccines is on the same level as Axl singing about how he felt about a girl when he was 24 or a journalist when he was 28. I also believe that if people want to criticize Axl for some of the things he writes, that's fair as well. I personally take his lyrics as art and not advocacy. I would imagine most sane people would too. But that said, if Axl promoted suicide to people who were having a tough time I'd be the first to tell him to fuck off. If the next Guns single is all about the virtues of hydroxychloroquine, count me out on being a Guns or Axl Rose fan going forward.

This post is a fine example of why it's fair to blame Rogan for saying the absolute nonsense he says. Rogan is a self-professed idiot who has told people not to believe him when it comes to views on vaccines and politics. The fact he continues to say nonsense and yet is perceived as some well-informed individual is another example of why people who have huge platforms have a responsibility to not lead their listeners astray. What aisle is Alex Jones on?

That still doesn't absolve Rogan (or anyone else with a huge platform) for being responsible for what they put out there. It's a cop out to say, "I can say whatever I want and if people choose to believe me, that's on them."

The difference here being that no one has an audience or platform like Rogan. Everyone is wrong from time to time, but very few have the audience Rogan has. The fact he spews the nonsense he does with little or no responsibility for what he says to his millions of listeners is what myself and others take issue with.

Agreed. They're charging theatre prices for stadium shows. They can play how many hours they want, but the prices just reek of greed. Some might argue that it's the promoters who are setting ticket prices. That is true. However, prices are a reflection of up-front fees artists are charging promoters. The artist also gets a cut from VIP packages. I was fine with the money grab in 2016/2017 when fans were getting the (sort of) reunion show they've long wanted. But prices this high seven years out? It's just insulting. GNR prices are in line with what Taylor Swift is charging and at least with her there have been new albums in the last few years and demand (sort of) justifies the prices. Not to mention Swift is in her prime; GNR's prime was decades ago.

I was kind of shocked when they announced they'd be doing a stadium tour in 2023. The European shows seem well attended so thought maybe I was off. But yikes. Guess this is what you get when you try to soak your fans. Ticket prices are impossible to justify. All the best to you attending shows this year but I can't justify the expense, all things considered.

Yeah, agreed. Nothing about the MCU gets me excited now. I'm also even burned out on Spiderman, despite how good the last two movies have been. It's going to be difficult for them to get people as interested in second-rate comic book characters now that the main characters have all had their moment. The issue for Disney and other studios is that many of these movies cost a fortune to make. $500 million return no longer ensures a film is profitable or worth the investment. New IP can be risky, but it seems as though this summer has finally revealed how tired people are tired of sequels. Indiana Jones, Mission Impossible, Fast and the Furious, Transformers - all had lacklustre returns (at least in North America, I know Fast 10 did well internationally). Hopefully this sends a signal that flogging established series isn't the guaranteed pay day it once was. This seems like a mistake to me. Why not take what was successful with The Batman and Joker and build on that? Or does this just mean that all Batman related characters will live separately from anything Gunn and Elsewords are doing? It depends with the Joker. What I found compelling about the film was that it was less about the character itself and more of an indictment of his environment that helped make him. It really flipped the switch on whether Batman really is the good guy in all of this. Not to say the Joker is, but the film argues that the neglect of our worst off citizens isn't solved by having a rich man beat them up in a costume years later. What Phillips does in the second film will be interesting since the character has now been established (or molded). If it's just the Joker causing mayhem for mayhem's sake it likely won't resonate like the first. And yeah, I'm certainly guilty of holding off from seeing films in theatres because I know it's only going to be a couple of months before I can see them on whatever streaming service I subscribe to. Going to the movies has become incredibly expensive the last ten to fifteen years that it makes going as often as I use to financially impossible. It's a shame they don't adjust the pricing according to the film/box office. I can't justify paying $14-$15 a ticket to see a comedy on a big screen. Maybe a big spectacle movie like Avengers or Star Wars, but the experience of a comedy isn't predicated on the size of a screen. Streaming sites are also feeding into superhero fatigue. While I do enjoy a lot of the Marvel and Star Wars shows that Disney puts on their streaming service, they also make me less likely to see a big franchise film in theatre since I'm kind of burnt out on the topic and can't justify the $40-$50 I'd spend going to the show with my wife. The business model does not seem like it was well thought out.

The problem for me with DC is that there hasn't been a whole lot of quality. Even worse is that the DC world has felt disjointed. Films that might have been received better on their own are instead sandwiched with competing visions/universes. I can't say that many DC films can be considered great. Several have been good or marginally enjoyable, but nothing that compares to what Marvel achieved with The Avenger, Captain America (Winter Soldier and Civil War), Thor Ragnarok, and The Black Panther. Wonder Woman was a solid 7/10 for me (the first one, 1984 was dreadful), Aquaman a 6.5, and Man of Steel an 8. The Justice League films were not great (both the original release and the Snyder Cut), and Batman Vs. Superman was a disappointment. Combine the mediocrity with the lack of coordination and competing visions and it became a mess at the end. How or why they didn't tie The Batman and The Joker together is kind of mind-blowing. I thought The Batman was good, but a half hour to 45 minutes too long. I also didn't appreciate the post-credit clip where they introduced a new Joker, despite the fact we know they're making a sequel to the The Joker that will have nothing to do with The Batman. It get hard for me to care if there's multiple people playing the same character over a short period of time. Despite its runtime, The Batman would have been more enjoyable if it was a reboot of the entire series. But wedged into what was going on with the Snyderverse it felt like WB was just throwing darts against the wall. The only thing that completely worked for me in the DC universe the past ten years is what James Gunn did with The Suicide Squad and later The Peacemaker tv series. Both the film and the tv show felt apart of, and built from, the Snyder-verse but really worked in the ways all the other properties did not. It finally matched the somewhat cartoonish aesthetic of the Snyder-verse and aligned it with a tone that didn't take itself so serious. While I really liked and appreciated what Nolan did with his Batman series, that sort of real-world, gritty tone only really works with certain characters, like Batman. The idea of Superman somehow appearing in Nolan's Batman series feels absurd. If Gunn is aiming to recreate a Marvel like universe for DC characters, I think he'd be wise to follow the path he started with The Suicide Squad.

I have a lot of faith in James Gunn, so I'm sure I'll see it and won't be shocked if I enjoy it. It will be interesting how and if WB and Disney reorient their big franchises in the next couple of years considering the lacklustre response to superhero films this year.

Surreal… https://www.thedailybeast.com/feud-between-moscow-and-wagner-group-turns-to-all-out-war?ref=home

If I had one shared stage moment request, it would be to see Axl and Elton share the stage for likely one last time. Elton did Axl a solid back at the MTV Awards way back when. It would be cool to see Axl repay the favour.

I provided a link to the BBC iPlayer in the first post. It works for UK residents, not for international. Best option for everyone else is to use a VPN.

Only two VR songs that did anything for me were You've Got No Right and This Fight. Top notch melodies in both songs. The rest didn't do much for me.