Jump to content

Tyson

Members
  • Posts

    377
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Tyson

  1. This article blows.  The author seems like an angry, unfulfilled person who projects his personal discontent onto his writing, which at the time happened to be about GNR.  His assertion that the interest surrounding this reunion is solely about nostalgia is absurd.  A significant amount of GNR's audience weren't even around during their heyday and being excited about seeing your favorite band live in concert isn't just about nostalgia, it's about wanting to be enthralled by hearing and seeing your favorite music performed in person.  

  2. I think Axl finally understood the importance of be in shape to this new chapter of GNR... He has time to get in shape, four months untill the date of the first show on april...

    He finally understood that the crowd dont want to see him out of shape on kimmel, and that the fans expect his best effort...

    Thats MY OPINION....

    Well, it's also highly likely that Axl has known for months that public appearances to support the reunion announcement were likely and he STILL wasn't able to be adequately in shape. Opportunity blown. The buzz for this is significant, but it should have been BIGGER.

  3. Axl has known for a while that a high profile reunion was likely....and yet he looks very bloated and out of shape. A bad sign and will be awful PR if he looks that bad on Kimmel.

    To be honest, when he isn't wearing sweat pants and a bagy sweater I think he will look ok. Once make up ect is applied for TV

    Not sure about that....and regardless, he needs to be in TOP shape for this tour. Is 4 months enough, assuming he's highly motivated, to even achieve a necessary level of physical and cardiovascular shape?

    • Like 1
  4. Too few albums unfortunately.

    Fair point...but in my original post I intentionally specified that I wanted to limit the scope of the conversation to the quality of the music, not the quantity...so for example, if you considered GnR at their best (whatever you consider that to be) and compare that to Zep/Stones at their best (whatever you consider that to be), how does Guns hold up?

    I am absolutely convinced that Guns N Roses, pound for pound, are as good as Led Zeppelin and The Rolling Stones. End of story.

    I am absolutely convinced you either don't get The Stones, or you've got shit taste in music. Gotta be one of those cause there's no fuckin' way in hell. Pounds, kilos, or sacks of shit.

    Do you know how many great albums The Stones created? how original they were compared to Guns? Influence? you just name it. Guns had nothing on The Stones. Nothing. They were their own retro thing and they were also great, but not on the level of The Stones. Never on the level of The Stones. It's not even close.

    I'm pretty sure you're a moron. Thanks for the laugh.

  5. Too few albums unfortunately.

    Fair point...but in my original post I intentionally specified that I wanted to limit the scope of the conversation to the quality of the music, not the quantity...so for example, if you considered GnR at their best (whatever you consider that to be) and compare that to Zep/Stones at their best (whatever you consider that to be), how does Guns hold up?

    I am absolutely convinced that Guns N Roses, pound for pound, are as good as Led Zeppelin and The Rolling Stones. End of story.

×
×
  • Create New...