downzy

Agreed. Wasn't defending their response. But it's a standard boilerplate response usually authored by someone who is paid to do their jobs.

This was written by a PR person who likely has no knowledge of what actually happened.

That's a good question. I don't know the man at all, nor have I had any personal encounters with him, but I find it very difficult to believe that at present time Duff would tolerate any of this stuff had he known. Maybe many didn't. Fernando was the gatekeeper for a lot of them. For all we know Kat never informed any of the primary individuals in the band out of fear of being fired and/or having her reputation in the industry killed. Lots of wild stuff happens with rock bands; she might have thought who would want to hire a female photographer like her that can't let some of it roll off her back. So who knows. But for Duff, a guy who just released a solo album that touches on mental health and who is always championing his wife and daughters, it's difficult to believe he'd accept this behaviour from someone like Fernando (or anyone). I'm sure he loved playing with Axl and Slash again and making a ton of money, but he certainly doesn't need the cash to afford his lifestyle. Family members have falling outs all the time. It could happen. We'll have to see.

That only solves a logistical and public relations issue. Firing Fernando doesn't end the lawsuit though. The sooner they pay her, the better they'll all be. Sad to say, but that's how these things work. It's gross mismanagement to let the accusations and details become publicly known. None of us needed to know any of this (though I'm glad we do now). For that alone, and for the reasons noted in the legal filing, Fernando needs to go.

The contractual stuff seems rather cut and dry. Either you have a contract or you don't. Seems like Kat is getting ahead of the argument that she was "just an employee" and as such subjected to the terms Guns lays out for their employees. The sexual harassment stuff is where they're probably going to want to settle asap. Even if her accusations are difficult to prove, all sorts of stuff will come out in discovery. And it likely won't be limited to just Fernando. Do Axl, Slash, and Duff really want a lot of their dirty laundry aired? Probably not. To be honest I'm surprised it got this far. One wonders whether the principal players knew this was coming and whether Fernando overplayed his hand. From a business perspective, they would have been better to have paid Kat off before any legal action was filed.

TB will likely still exist. But it will depend on the terms. And usually NDAs make provisions for these types of situations.

Agreed. Many of the allegations, like sending inappropriate images or demanding sex, feel like they have supporting evidence like text chains or call records. Plus there are likely those around the band that could corroborate her accounts. I hope Fernando managed his money well because I think (and honestly, hope) his days managing any artist, let alone GNR, are done. Or at least, they should be.

Very true. If the allegations are accurate or proven, what a terrible place to operate as a female photographer.

Yes. It will be interesting to see the fallout. Will some members demand Fernando step away and if that doesn't happen, does the band continue? This coming Thanksgiving dinner at the Rose household sure will be interesting. Izzy stayed away because he wasn't going to get paid what he felt was fair. No other reason. He was around the band back in the day when way worse stuff was likely happening.

It's as if the #metoo movement never happened.

This... If we are to believe the summary laid out in Kat's legal filing, it basically boils down to not dotting your i's and crossing your t's. Why you wouldn't ensure contracts were in place for any person, let alone your official band/tour photographer, on one of the biggest reunion tours in the last 20-30 years is beyond me.

I think a lot of the incriminations and issues around Marvel and superhero films in general are overthought. I don't see it as all that complicated. When you release 25+ films in a 15-20 year span that's essentially telling the same story, using relatively the same tone, and you've already used up your biggest chess pieces, audiences are going to lose interest once you get to narrative bookend (i.e. Endgame). People like to think that the first couple of Iron Man or Thor films were great or are any better than the films they've been putting out the last couple of years. But really, they were just new. They used some of Marvel's biggest IPs. And more importantly, they were in the building phase, always alluding to something bigger coming down the pipe that kept audiences coming back for more. I'd argue that Marvel was always going to lose audience share regardless of what they put out (or not put out). Add in the tv shows and you get too a saturation point where people have had enough. The incels of the world would have you believe it's because Marvel went woke. Come on. Outside of Spiderman or Guardians, nothing in Marvel post Endgame is going to compete with the characters they had prior. There was no "right path" to keeping people's attention once you've burned through Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Captain America, Black Panther. Marvel would have been better off had they taken a four or five year break and restarted the next phase with X-Men and/or the Fantastic Four. Endgame was enough for most people. It's not a matter of execution, but knowing your audience and when they have had enough (which is kind of what Disney is now doing with Star Wars with respect to the films). I think had the last Ant-Man or The Marvels been released prior to Endgame they would have done significantly better. Outside of Guardians (and I guess the last Spiderman film - which had less to do with its Marvel connection and more to do with tying in all prior Spiderman films), there was nothing going to sustain Marvel's momentum following Endgame. I don't think Marvel lost its way. It just tried to keep the party going with the less popular kids long past the sun had come up.

The movie is still an hour and forty five minutes. I haven't seen it yet (plan to over the next few days as I really liked the first film), so maybe the sequence is rushed and I'll withhold judgement until I see it. Maybe it tries to do too much. But over 60 percent of film critics still endorse the film, and it's getting a positive view from the majority of theatre-goers (85 percent on rotten tomatoes). I'm someone who stopped caring about these films a long time ago. At the same time, I haven't found any Marvel film difficult to watch or unenjoyable (though the second Thor film was a bit of a drag at times).

Really? Most of the reviews I've read recommend it as enjoyable entry into the series.

Looks good, especially with returning the franchise back to NYC.

I enjoyed it. Is it "A Day In the Life?" No. But better to have it than not. It is a bit bittersweet though. The song represents the final bookend of one of the greatest cultural outputs of the 20th century. The Beatles will be held in the same regard as Michelangelo, Shakespeare, Mozart, Picasso and other seminal artists who revolutionized their art, affecting contemporaries and those who came after them. Guns might be my favourite band, but for me, The Beatles are the greatest band of all time. They will withstand the test of time like few other musicians will.

The problem is that the other Arab nations don't want them. Israel offered Gaza to Egypt awhile back and Egypt said no thanks.

Final warning on asking for leaks. At this point we'll start banning anyone who asks for them. Thanks!

Please keep discussions respectful. Insults and personal attacks are not tolerated here. Thanks!

You’re right! Completely forgot the Mets lost in 2015. Either way, your defence of the Mets feels familiar as a Guns fan 🤪

Mets last won the world series in ‘86, with one appearance since then in 2000 (which they lost). Google Stewie Griffin Mets Fan.

Guns fans are to rock music as New York Mets fans are to baseball.

But why? How does or will the “success” of The General affect your enjoyment of the song? Moreover, if the guy who helped to create the song and laboured for years to get it to where they want doesn’t care about achieving maximum success for it, why should any of us?

It’s why I bought the place. 😝

Do you think Axl cares all that much about money and publicity at this point? If I had to guess, and it’s just a guess, an initial physical only release likely works for Axl’s desire to do something different; the mystique of it all and a throwback to how music use to be distributed. I think concerns over marketing, exposure, and generating income from a 20+ year old song are misplaced.