PatrickS77

2 hours ago, jamillos said:

But wouldn't summer 2021 shows be only announced about a half-year ahead, like it usually is? Maybe not in all cases (festivals?), but I know for sure that when Guns play in Prague in June/July, the news doesn't come before November/December. 

Irrelevant. It's a different situation now.

1 hour ago, BigVanVader said:

I'm very happy with the seat I got and it's entirely possible I wouldn't be able to buy as good of a ticket if the show gets cancelled.  It's also possible that the entertainment industry will be depressed even after the mythical COVID-19 is beat.

I think it's irresponsible to even assume concerts and large gatherings will be feasible even in 2021.  I would cancel the tour dates outright (where possible), and try again once things return to normal (earliest date is after November 2020)

Why? They still can cancel again, should the situation not improve.

5 hours ago, StayofExecution2020 said:

It's unbelievable we still haven't gotten any information regarding tickets. Amateurish and disrespectful. Fuck you @Fernando

New dates will be announced July 6th. At least that's what the promoter in Ireland says.

https://mcd.ie/rescheduled-events/

I'm sure that will be for all the (european) dates.

41 minutes ago, downzy said:

It's being reported Florida has recorded close to 9000 new cases in the past 24 hours, smashing previous records almost by a factor of 100 percent.  

But I wouldn't worry about it.  This woman has it figured out:

 

Ughh... Florida.

 

Yeah. Her time definitely has expired. Geez. These people are all so fucked up. That becomes so apparent when you let them talk and sift through comments.

On 23.6.2020 at 8:47 PM, action said:

yes, there are examples of viruses not going away.

corona will, because people develop antibodies. do you agree that some people develop antibodies, others dont? I suppose you do. Do you also agree that some people die, others dont? of course, you do. So it's then not hard to understand that in the end, only those who have a strong natural resistance to the virus, will survive. Ergo, the virus will go away by itself. Certainly not without a significant amount of victims, but it will go away. That's my point. nothing more, nothing less.

In other words it will go away, once all the people who can't handle it have died off?! How many will that be? 1 Million? 10 Million? 100 Million? More? And how long will that take? 1 year? 100 years (assuming they can't come up with a vaccine/people refuse to take it)? Or maybe it will just stick around and continue to affect some more than others. Funny how experts are not sure that it will go away, how they are not even sure how long antibodies will protect you from getting it again, but you know that it will go away!?

4 hours ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Burton's Batman films are where it's at. Nolan did a great job, but went way too realistic (damn Anglo's and their empiricism). 

Nolan's films didn't have any moments like this

 

Yeah. And that Batmobile is the sexiest car ever.

17 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Not too different.  Say you’re a man innocent of committing a murder but the world thinks you’re guilty, its a strong man that can brush that shit off and live the rest of their life not giving a fuck.  My point is, to get corny on you for a moment and quote Jack Nicholson in The Departed, when you’re facing a loaded gun, whats the difference?  And on some level he was cuz anyone that thinks his death wasn’t, on some level, something to do with those accusations and the psychic weight of all that shit is kidding themselves.

There are few, who would argue that being branded a pedophile by ignorant people, while being innocent, didn't alter the course of his life and didn't lead to his early death. Stage fright, anxiety, mistrust, being paranoid.... everything happened because of how his life got derailed by these accusations.

And yes, it is very different. One is a falsely accused and the other is a criminal. A difference of night and day.

For a while he didn't give a fuck, he did things how he wanted, so that's why he always had children around and never made a secret about it, while at the same time, he wanted to show that nothing perverted and nothing wrong was going on, which was his undoing and downfall because the world and certain people couldn't handle that and it led to the trial in '03-'05. Had he not wanted to show the world that there was no wrong doing going on, things would have taken a different turn.

41 minutes ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

I wouldn't be surprised if Axl is actually one of the few people out there who can relate to Michael Jackson with ease when it comes to his efforts to create a happy childhood for himself as an adult. Axl himself was well into his 30s when he started referring to Beta as his mother as if he was one of the Lebeis children. Similarly, Michael Jackson surrounded himself with families that he liked and behaved as if he was one of the children. I don't know if Axl ever took it quite as far as MJ, but overall it's easy to see the similarity.

Yes. That is not so much different. Axl also adopted a family, because he's to fucked up and broken to get one of his own and has the money to do so. Also not perfectly normal.

3 hours ago, Amaya said:

( I promised myself I would not enter here or post here again at all. Broke my promise to myself as I sit at the car dealership for auto repair. I have a few hours .lol)   I agree with you. The Bashir interview and 60 mins interview were cringeworthy. When an entertainer has Yes People around and lives in a Bubble, weird things happen. Yes I see some MJ fans here. . Yes, I know of Jordan's case could have gone buh- bye and had never been a case if Micheal would have cut Jordan's father a check and set him up in the business end of the business. That is what Jordan's father, the dentist, wanted. Blackmail. Yes I saw the recent HBO interview last year with the three other guys . WTF, what mother and father would allow their sons to have sleepovers and pillow fights and pizza and ice cream pigouts and movies with a grown azz man. These parents did because they were jetted all over the world on a private plane with shopping sprees, 5 star hotels, bills paid, etc. Cringeworthy. If Ms. Janedoe or Mr.Johndoe from around the corner wants to  hang out, be friends, sleep over with your kids, SURE YOU WOULD SAY YEAH, and your kids names are SmithWestonGlock. Take your pick.                                                MJ, what an enormous ,brilliant  talent. We will never know truth. Pick what you want to believe. TRUTH FACT, he had no gotdam business being pals, buddies, friends with those little White boys . I will post in pm or here if anyone says, why did I say White boys.                                                                             Bringing my post back to the original topic which we derailed from,  Axls reasons were his. Slash reasons were his. Slash was just expanding his brand at that time. Being a "real "parent changes you. Hellnah was Perla or Slash let MJ around their kids. MJ died when London and Cash were babies,  but lets say MJ died yesterday. Ain't no way in hell would Perla and Slash have let their boys pal around with even Prince, Paris, Blanket and their daddy. Maybe MJs kids could have gone by SlashPerlas BevHills home, but not the other way around.

White boy?

And you really have no idea who Slash's kids would be around would Michael be alive. Having your kids not around someone, who's just standing trial for alleged child molestation is just common sense and not really an idictment that you really think he did that. Slash simply could not know 100% for sure and knew how it would look.

12 hours ago, Len Cnut said:

If you sleep in bed with little boys, and openly admit it on telly, you're gonna get called a pedo for the rest of your life, regardless of whether you stick your finger up their bum or not.  Perhaps just...y'know, leave the kids alone?  You ain't fuckin' Willy Wonka, you're some black geezer from a soul band out of Indiana.

People saying you are one and being one are 2 different things though.

On 21.6.2020 at 12:37 PM, EvanG said:

I don't remember every season, but I believe that after season 5 they get a little bit back on track again (although not as good as the first seasons), but then it goes bad again and the last season is probably the worst.

Yes. The last good season is 4. After that it gets messy and you can only enjoy it, while willingly overlooking the flaws. It does get a little better from the low point towards the end, but still a far cry from Season 1 to 4.

31 minutes ago, Padme said:

I think Christian Bale was his "curtain call as Batman" Sure Keaton is the lesser evil compare to Kilmer, Clooney, Afleck and Pattison. But his Batman was even more campy than Adam West Batman t.v. show. Not Keaton's fault. Jack Nicholson was not what the Joker should be. And Batman Return was just horrible. That movie wasted a great cast

Except. Batman, the character, wasn't campy. Nicholson's Joker was more Joker than Ledger's and Batman returns was the best Batman movie of them all. The Nolan ones were pretentious claptrap, but not really Batman. A total bore.

26 minutes ago, rocknroll41 said:

Yeah not to mention we have the Pattinson Batman film coming up, as well as the director’s cut of JL, with Affleck still in the role there. Three movie Batmans all at once! So confusing!

Yeah. I already deleted that out of my mind. And forgot about the other one.

Wow! That would be awesome. He's still my favourite Batman. But Ezra Miller as the Flash and Keaton as Batman? He was in JL with Affleck as Batman. What a mess. Really, it is embarrassing how clueless DC/Warner are with their properties.

1 minute ago, Blackstar said:

By this logic, many of the forum discussions should be let to rest, as people have always been posting opinions and coming up with theories about subjects where there is even less information than about this one.

But few of the topics descend into people, who have no clue, accusing a dead man of being a child molestor, which was not the original topic. Unless the OP, who is awfully quiet in this thread, intended just that with his question.

12 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

What? Are you talking to me? 

Obviously not.

3 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

You're referring to my post, I suppose? First off, the article I cited doesn't contain the claim you mention (that was in a much later article by the same writer, as I found out).

Most importantly, my aim was to show what Axl and Zutaut could have been reading at the time (that may very well have been defamatory or imbalanced), along with the rest of the public, which could have made Axl believe in MJ's guilt at the time (and I quoted only the part containing the comments from Michael Jackson's defense). This is the topic of the thread and this is what I'm interested in. Like I said, I have no interest in making a point about the actual Michael Jackson case and about his innocence or guilt.

Yeah. But it shows that the writer is nuts, biased and nothing she says is to be taken serious. And anybody following that link and reading it, should know what kind of person that writer is.

And once again, I know why I asked to "let it rest". 

1 hour ago, SoulMonster said:

Yes, I think it is clear that Slash's collaboration with MJ, and all allegations of child molestations aside, was something quite different from the other collabs Slash got involved in. Usually his collaborations would be rather short-time things which he got involved in while the band was having downtimes. To keep himself busy and sharp. It worked for everyone because it helped brand GN'R and it helped keep Slash clean and active. And Axl likely thought it was great to see someone he admired get out there and share his art with the rest of the world, as he stated in that quote from my previous post. With MJ it was quite different. This was a much more long-term thing that involved studio-work and live playing (Slash even took time off from the UYI touring to feature in a MJ music video) and Axl might have seen this as a possible threat to GN'R in 1994/1995 when Slash was starting to obviously be less interested in GN'R.

He didn't take "time off". The video was shot in Munich, Germany in June '92, sometime between the 17th and the 26th, while GNR had shows in Germany, Switzerland and Netherlands. But yeah, someone as insecure as Axl might feel threatened, if his guitarist strikes up a working relationship with the biggest star in the world.

And as for quoting that hit piece by a cunt, who claimed that Michael Jackson bathed in blood of 42 cows, to put a spell on his enemies, why not quote a more balanced and objective article on the '93 case, called "Was Michael Jackson framed?". Since it all but disappeared people who are interested can read about it here:

https://mjjtruthnow.wordpress.com/2014/05/20/was-michael-jackson-framed-the-defining-1994-gq-article-by-mary-a-fischer-that-set-the-record-straight-on-the-1993-allegations/

and then follow up from there on all anyone would would want to know about it.

8 hours ago, Free Bird said:

Your timeline just doesn't fit. Axl saved the name in '92 when there was no accusation against Michael. 

Exactly. The timeline doesn't fit, so there are really only 2 explanations for Axl's comment regarding the Video Vanguard Award:

1) Michael Jackson worked with Slash in '91. In '92 GNR got that award and Axl was concerned that anyone could think that GNR got that award due to their association with Jackson.

2) In an unprecedented move MTV renamed that award after a living contemporary artist to "Michael Jackson Video Vanguard Award" in '91, which, I don't think, has ever happened before or since and a petty, competitive and insecure little person like Axl, as one of the first artists who got awarded that renamed award, probably took issue with that.

9 minutes ago, LunsJail said:

No. Michael Jackson molested loads of kids and he was a fucking nutjob to boot.

Repeating your misinformed bullshit don't make it any true. But that's always the problem with characters like you. Bullshit talk, knowing nothing and nothing to back their shit up.

16 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

I'm not referring only to this particular thread, but to similar threads before. People have used Axl's quote about considering MJ one of the great singers as enough proof that he couldn't have believed that; or they refuse the potential interpretation of the VMA speech as a dig at MJ. I remember an old thread where someone had even made a video about it.

That's why I said, let it rest. The last we heard Axl talk about Michael is that he enjoyed him as a singer. I doubt he would do that if he thought he's a child molestor. Unless we have a new quote of him about Michael, there is no point of bringing that up again.

Just now, Blackstar said:

I wasn't talking about accepting it as a certainty (I didn't say that I accepted it as fact either), but about accepting it as a possibility.

Who here said that it is impossible that Axl doesn't like Michael??

8 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

I don't understand, though, why they can't accept that Axl may have had a problem with him at one point and he may have believed either that he was guilty or even that it was possible he was guilty. 

 

Because we'll never know until we hear from Axl. All we hear is through third parties who might have their own problems with Michael Jackson.

17 hours ago, cqleonardo said:

Is there any truth to it? I always read that Axl didn't like MJ over the acusations Michael suffered in the 90s and that he got really pissed at Slash because he went to play on Dangerous... But it doesn't make any sense, Dangerous was released in 1991, two years before any acusations. The UYI ended in mid july of 93, the acusations on Michael got public on late august, so GNR wasn't even on the road and I bet Axl and Slash were very far from each other at that point... So, anyone knows if there is any truth to this or the "feud" didn't even existed?

Yes. So let it rest. Some years ago Axl mentioned Michael as one of the singers he enjoyed.

7 hours ago, Sydney Fan said:

I dont know why he never did a prenup. Maybe after the major fight with his first wife  renee that lead to an OD he probably thought a prenup wasnt worth the hassle again.

Hmm. Well. I guess it would have been. Stupid, if he didn't and the settlement was done against his will.

12 hours ago, vloors said:

Wow judge fd him over pretty bad. 

 

Well. If it is a settlement, he agreed with this.