Madridista

Well, I saw the band in South America back in 2010 twice and Axl was late 4 hours the first time I saw them and close to 3 hours the second time.

Having read most of the Why did Robin leave? thread, where it is clearly stated that Robin wasn't pleased with Axl taking the stage so late, as well as the biographies by the ex gunners, where that is a recurring theme too, I can't help but wonder why Axl does this.

He's not stupid. He must know this affects both the band and his fans from a certain point of view.

Any reasons? Has he ever talked about this?

Just wondering

This has been discussed 500 times one here. Because he wants to.

I apologize for being new here and for not reading every single thread created here since this forum exists

Having read most of the Why did Robin leave? thread, where it is clearly stated that Robin wasn't pleased with Axl taking the stage so late, as well as the biographies by the ex gunners, where that is a recurring theme too, I can't help but wonder why Axl does this.

He's not stupid. He must know this affects both the band and his fans from a certain point of view.

Any reasons? Has he ever talked about this?

Just wondering

So... GnR now is better because they replaced the original members???

I'm sure Slash is sick and tired of anything that's GnR related. Granted, he'll play a couple of songs here and there. But I'm sure his memories of his time in GnR are not what we'd want them to be. We're mere fans. He was there. Through all the crap. I'm willing to bet Slash prefers playing his solo stuff.

Anyway, Don't cry would be nice.

If you're the frontman and a band leader, you need to be there every step of the way. Does anyone honestly think that by not showing up to rehearsals, by only communicating with this friends/colleagues in the band through management Axl was really helping GnR move forward?

I mean, one thing is to be late 2 hours for a show, but... standing up your band time and time again? Yeah... what a leader

Biggest Axl mistake? Being late 80% of the time and storming off stage for stupid reasons. If he hadn't done that, chances are we'd still have GnR. Granted, Duff and Slash would've had to go to rehab and get sober for good, but I think they'd have agreed to do that after the UYI tour. I'm conviced Duff turned his life around after his kidney exploded. He'd have been sober and would've been able to think clearly. Maybe Slash would've followed suit and go to rehab too. Who knows? Maybe Izzy would've returned if they'd all gotten sober and kicked off their drug habit. IMHO.

I mean, it doesn't take a genius to realize that Axl's chronic tardiness affected Guns n Roses beyond repair. Didn't Izzy leave because he couldn't take the drugs, the alcohol and Axl's tardiness anymore? Correct me if I'm wrong, GnR historians, but wasn't the last straw on the camel's back the St. Louis riot and the almost-riot in Germany?

Both Duff and Slash say, and of course you gotta take what they say with a grain of salt, that Axl's tardiness created tension and animosity. The riots, cancelled gigs... it all played a part.

And of course, the drugs and alcohol in Duff's and Slash's lives.

It was gonna happen sooner or later.

Why does Axl keep a muzzle on his band? Why doesn't Axl promote them more? Why don't they give interviews? Don't they want to?

I mean, if Axl really wanted the general public, not the die-hard fans in this forum, to accept his new band as GnR, why doesn't he do a better job at promoting them?

I'm willing to bet that if you ask a casual GnR fan out there what the new members' names are, chances are they don't even know.

That must surely affect the band, somehow.

Sometimes I wonder how they feel. As individuals, as artists, as musicians. If I were a musician and played in a band, and wasn't allowed to say anything or give interviews or whatever, would I really feel a part of the band?

And of course I'm sure the money is great, but you know what I mean. Do they really have a say in what happens in the band?

To most fans and people out there, the new gunners are faceless and nameless musicians. I know, I know. You guys are die-hard fans, and you know what they have for breakfast and what color their underwear is, but I guess over 50% of any given band's fanbase is not made up of die-hard fans.

Slash, Duff, Izzy are iconic figures, iconic musicians. Everybody knows who they are. And I'm not gonna get into an argument about who's better, 'cause it's all a matter of taste. But you can say that making 1 album in 15 years and no promotion whatsoever doesn't help a band. The old lineup wrote more music and they were EVERYWHERE: interviews, vídeos, magazines, etc etc etc... nowadays, with the internet, promoting a band should be even easier.

So you could conclude that Axl just doesn't wanna promote his band. WHY?

Man, I'd really like to get inside Axl's head. See what goes on there

In short, I think the answer is a resounding 'yes,' but I understand the people who feel otherwise and where they're coming from.

Let me elaborate:

Even though Tommy's been there since shortly after Duff left and stuck with Axl all these years, by the time he joined the band Axl was already the defacto leader. And over the years, the band was largely inactive (at least in the public eye) and has only released one record in the 15 years since Tommy joined.

What this means is that all the while he was technically 'in' the band, people began listening more to - and even growing up on - the 'classic' GN'R music and image. No matter what anyone desires or argues for, Slash, Duff and Izzy in particular will forever be recognized as GN'R along with Axl - in the cultural perspective, particularly Slash.

Tommy is an awesome guy, made great music with The Replacements and deserves respect. But at the same time, Axl kept such a muzzle on these guys that - this is really the key here, imo - they have no personalities to the average person. People go to see their shows when they tour and the guys are getting paid to put on great performances, they do a killer job, but after the lights go down, they disappear...some of them now have Twitter which is a step forward, but Axl never helped (or allowed?) them to be promoted as 'Guns N' Roses,' so guys like Tommy are hated for basically being team players - he's been there longer than Duff but ask someone on the street and they'll say it's just Axl and some stand-ins. The fact that there were never any true band interviews done, or even a fucking band photo, spells disaster. I open magazines and see short little interviews with guys like Josh Kliffwhateverhisname from RHCP, who replaced another member - these guys were instantly out there promoting themselves as new bandmembers, but you never open Rolling Stone and see an interview with Tommy, you know?

So as for the disdain and scorn from old-band fans, Tommy doesn't deserve it, but for a plethora of reasons that's what he gets. Some guys here like Almost Famous have made an effort to shoot the shit with some of the bandmembers (if I'm not mistaken AF went to see some of Tommy's solo shows) and I think that's really cool and a step forward -- but ultimately these guys don't have any strong personality unless you're a die-hard fan on the Internet going out of your way to follow them, and even then you're gonna have a hard time finding them talking freely about the band (how many times has BBF been asked a question about the band's future and said 'That's up to Axl to decide,' etc.?). DJ is probably the most open but most of the time he redirects questions about GN'R toward his own business ventures - there's not much of a sense of a traditional 'band,' which maybe doesn't mean much when it comes time to write the music (I now see GN'R as a collective of talented musicians moreso than the traditional image of a 'band'), but it does pose a problem in the sense that for many people that will keep them from ever recognizing guys like Tommy as true bandmembers - even though he's an awesome player and has been in the group so long.

WOW... you hit the nail on the head. One of the best posts I've ever read here.

Well, Slash says in his book that Axl is brutally honest.

Huh?

@ DizzyReedsexmachine

wow... you don't even like This I love or Sorry? Those are great songs

Axl could make the movie himself.

And then never release it.

Ok, so I've been exclusively listening to CD for the past couple of days and I'm getting more and more into it. I don't know if it's that I'm getting used to it or if I'm listening to it without a judgmental attitude. Either way, I've discovered that I like more songs than I thought.

I just wanted to ask you, how do you rate the songs on CD today, 3 1/2 after it was released, on a 1 to 10 scale?

Chinese Democracy 7/10

Shackler's Revenge 7/10

Better 7/10

Street of Dreams 7/10

If the world 6/10

There was a time 3/10

Catcher in the rey 7/10

Scraped 4/10

Riad N the Bedouins 4/10

Sorry 7/10

IRS 6/10

Madagascar 6/10

This I love 7/10

Prostitute 6/10

I was thinking, Paul McCartney just turned 70, but of course there's a difference between singing Let it be and singing You could be mine or Better or Nightrain. I mean, those songs are more physically demanding.

Axl turned 50 this year. For how much longer do you think Axl will keep singing, touring, writing music, etc? 5 more years? 10 more years?

Just curious

An album featuring Izzy, Slash, Duff and Matt with a random singer, albeit a good one, would be very interesting and certainly worth listening to.

While these questions are interesting, it's impossible to predict what would've happened if he'd stayed. The fact that he was replaced so early on goes to show he had no place in the band. Correct me if I'm wrong though

How are you confused. Didn't you say you went to University at 11? This should be basic reading comprehension.

I'm confused by your behavior. I understood what you were saying, just didn't understand why you would be saying it based on your prior actions.

I also think it's hilarious that your idea of "embarrassing" me is to remind people in each of your posts that I am a genius. What has our society come to when intelligence is frowned upon to that degree?

Let me break down my behavior. I think Paul is a useless and ruined Gn'R, so I posted and made my thoughts quite clear. You seemed confused that I posted my opinions as if I said one thing but meant the next. No. I think Paul is useless. U-S-E L-E-S-S. R-U-I-N-E-D G-N'-R.

My idea of "embarrassing" you is calling you out that you definitely did NOT go to college at eleven and if you truly were a genius you would understand that. Therefore no you did not go to college at eleven and no you are not a genius. And no, homeschool college by your mother is not really college.

Why do you say Paul ruined GnR?

Tom Cruise is the pinacle of lame this will be more embarrassing than the couch incident or the scientology interview.

the guy is a hack.

this

Oh, I agree. If the original lineup were to reunite, they'd need to write new material as soon as that reunion tour was over.

Firstly, your English is great!

I think there's two broad reasons this place is all arguments, bitterness, and people with unmoving steadfasts opinions (often hateful) of any member or previous member of GNR. The reasons are:

2. GNR doesn't do or release enough to keep us satisfied or to talk about. If there was more going on in GNR world we would talk about that instead of fighting about Axl vs. Kurt, etc. Built up frustrations with lack of new music, you know.

Yes, I agree.

As I think I said before, I regularly post in several online forums of other bands I'm a fan of. And I have to say, this forum is by far the one with the largest number of heated discussions and the highest level of animosity among the forum members.

By opening this thread, it is not my intention to offend anyone or to attack anyone. But I was just wondering if the animosity and verbal violence here could be symptomatic of Gnr's stormy history and ongoing/past feuds between Axl and the former gunners.

I can't help but compare this forum to the official Iron Maiden forum. You know, that band has achieved an enviable level of stability. They left the Bruce/Iron Maiden feud behind for good and now they make great records every 3 or 4 years. And I think that level of stability and peace within the band have permeated their fanbase, if you know what I mean. Forum members do get along and of course, you do get your average " who's a better guitarist?" or " who should be or should not be in the band" thread every once in a while. But my point is there's no animosity between the people that post there.

And I have to apologize for my English. It's not my first language and I'm still learning it. So please do forgive me if I haven't been able to make myself clear. I'm doing my best here to convey what I'm trying to say.

But here, it seems that every thread turns into a flame war. Even threads about " what's your favorite song" can turn into a flame war between fans taking sides on the Axl/Slash feud, even if they/we don't have anything to do with it.

Could that be a result of the band's history? You know, that has affected us as a fanbase?

Thanks.

Just curious.

... and even if those allegations were indeed true, why should we fans even care? I thought fans were here because of the music and, sometimes, the inner workings of a band. But, honestly, what difference does it make to us if Axl kills puppies while on tour or if Slash used to run over cockroaches before warming up? NONE whatsoever.

While this is a great idea, it's the kind of stuff that only die-hard fans spend their hard-earned money in. Your casual listeners, which make up more than 60% of any given band's fanbase, are often not interested in that sort of stuff. IMO.