Nintari Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 Truth is, new Guns will never achieve 1/10 of what old Guns achieved. They'll always be remembered as a fraud, whether any of us like it or not. So the old fans have NOTHING to be jealous about. I could see if CD sold 15 million records,spawned five top ten hits and went on to completely change rock music forever. Then maybe this whole "you're just jealous" thing would make sense or have some weight but that's not the case. I think it's sort of like politics. Someone who's neo con hates someone who's progressively liberal and when I say hate, I mean HATE. To them, they represent everything that is wrong with the world/society and it drives them completely crazy. This is exactly why fans of the original band act the way they do. They view this whole thing as an insult to a once legendary and unstoppable force. Everytime they see CD, it's like a middle finger to what Guns N Roses use to be and it makes them emotional and angry. The few people who actually support it, they're the enemy...so on and so forth. I think the fans of the new band got sick of this after awhile and decided to act like douche bags back....and now it's gotten to the point where both sides act like 10 year old children...but I digress. That's pretty much how I see it. Personally, I enjoy all the music. I love CD, but I refuse to accept that it's anything but Axl's VR. I wish Axl would give all four original members a call and regroup, but I'm not so bitter about it that I can't enjoy his music for what it is. Unfortunately, there's alot of people who aren't this mature and that's where you get all the bullshit but it is the way it is.I wonder what would happen if Axl had a change of heart and regrouped. What would happen to the fan base? Would the fans flip flop? It would be interesting to say the least.
Snake Eyes Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 Chinese Democracy songs sucks?hahahahahahahahahahaha+1Chinese Democracy is easily the best rock album of the '00s.Don't kid yourself. It was decent. Rock isnt limited to guns n' roses, velvet revolver, buckcherry and motley crue.LA Guns we're and will always be shite, even when gn'r members we're in them, why would anyone care if they changed the name?
Lines&Noses Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 Chinese Democracy songs sucks?hahahahahahahahahahaha+1Chinese Democracy is easily the best rock album of the '00s.Don't kid yourself. It was decent. Rock isnt limited to guns n' roses, velvet revolver, buckcherry and motley crue.LA Guns we're and will always be shite, even when gn'r members we're in them, why would anyone care if they changed the name?he he I wouldn't have put it quite that way but fact is GnR were much bigger than LA guns. Moreover the GnR fans in my experience seemed more comiited to GnR most seemd to consider them as their favourite band where as LA guns never got that much love on anything like the same scale.Upshot being apart from Traci Guns and possibly his mother noone cares.
ManetsBR Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 I HATE IT WHEN IDIOTS ORDER EVERYONE TO "DISCUSS." :fuckyou: DISCUSS IT YOURSELF, FUCKTWAT! * GUNS N ROSES - DISCUSSION & NEWSWell, answering the question.... IMO it's because the Guns N' Roses is always associated to Axl and Slash. It's like Plant and Page, Bon Jovi and Sambora.... fortunately this is changing.What I still ask myself is that if Slash would be the owner of the name today, and still used it, would people complain today like they complain about Axl? I don't think so. Slash is full of this politics skills, he would launch record after record, using the same and old hard rock formula. He still uses it today...
Lines&Noses Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 I HATE IT WHEN IDIOTS ORDER EVERYONE TO "DISCUSS." :fuckyou: DISCUSS IT YOURSELF, FUCKTWAT! * GUNS N ROSES - DISCUSSION & NEWSWell, answering the question.... IMO it's because the Guns N' Roses is always associated to Axl and Slash. It's like Plant and Page, Bon Jovi and Sambora.... fortunately this is changing.What I still ask myself is that if Slash would be the owner of the name today, and still used it, would people complain today like they complain about Axl? I don't think so. Slash is full of this politics skills, he would launch record after record, using the same and old hard rock formula. He still uses it today...I really don't agree even if Slash is the machiavellian genius you suppose I don't think a GnR without Axl would be received any better than the one without Slash. Sure they would be some die hards that would suport him whatever but the majority of fans would not.
Nintari Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 IMO it's because the Guns N' Roses is always associated to Axl and Slash. It's like Plant and Page, Bon Jovi and Sambora.... fortunately this is changing.No it's not....and it never will. When people see Slash, they will always think "Guns N Roses". This will never change until the the end of time.
Lines&Noses Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 (edited) IMO it's because the Guns N' Roses is always associated to Axl and Slash. It's like Plant and Page, Bon Jovi and Sambora.... fortunately this is changing.No it's not....and it never will. When people see Slash, they will always think "Guns N Roses". This will never change until the the end of time.This is true in my case. When I hear "Guns n Roses" I see the original band in my head. I have a feeling this is prolly the case for most fans of the original band. Its not about hating the new guys it just seems for me at least the die is cast. Edited July 7, 2010 by Lines&Noses
ManetsBR Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 IMO it's because the Guns N' Roses is always associated to Axl and Slash. It's like Plant and Page, Bon Jovi and Sambora.... fortunately this is changing.No it's not....and it never will. When people see Slash, they will always think "Guns N Roses". This will never change until the the end of time.I don't disagree of that. But me for example, the GNR picture in my mind is the actual band. Slash is not Guns N' Roses (he never was actually) since 1996.
Nintari Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 (edited) people who hate on the new band, some just plain dont like the music, and thats fair, but there are a lot more who just feel axl is bad, slash good, and that justify hating axl / new gnr because slash is the cool / good one and what axl did was wrong / unfair. people will say "it doesn't sound like guns n roses" but thats a bullshit excuse. even if it did sound like guns n roses people would still hate on axl for being mean to slash. "i would like shacklers revenge if it wasnt called guns n roses" thats the logic we are dealing with here. people are just butthurt over axls possession of the name and use "it doesnt sound like guns n roses" as a way to convey that. nintari talks about subconscious fuckin jealousy, i think the slash fans are the subconsciously jealous ones. jealous over axls possession of the name and his position of gatekeeper for a gnr reunion. what are axl fans jealous over? slashs solo album? lol.i have no problem with axl using the name. i dont buy into the axl bad - slash good bullshit. i think they have both done some very sketchy, and some very cool things. i think CD is a real gnr record, its in the spirit of gnr, so i really have no problem with that. plus, bucket was an upgrade on slash so things only improved 1996>2001.Couldnt have said it better myself.I could. Buckethead wasn't an upgrade. The general public viewed him as a freak show. Looks aside, his guitar work on Chinese Democracy had zero impact on rock music. It is already irrelevant. He had the greatest front man in the industry and still couldn't make himself relevant. Buckethead is an excellent guitarist, but he is better suited for his underground cult following. Not GNR. Buckethead is technically superior to Slash but that doesn't mean he's an upgrade. We don't want Buckethead in the Rolling Stones either, ya know?Oh, don't even TRY going there. Buckethead maniacs won't buy into the idea that he can't play every single fucking style on the planet. I love Bucket personally, but I'm not delusional enough to know his limitations. Slash OWNS blue based rock. He's right there with Paige,Perry and all the rest. Imo, Bucket owns the whole Satriani/Vai style...and there's really no one close. But people around here don't want to hear that. They're either too delusional in their fanboyism to see it, or know better and just don't want to concede the truth. Edited July 7, 2010 by Nintari
bacardimayne Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 (edited) people who hate on the new band, some just plain dont like the music, and thats fair, but there are a lot more who just feel axl is bad, slash good, and that justify hating axl / new gnr because slash is the cool / good one and what axl did was wrong / unfair. people will say "it doesn't sound like guns n roses" but thats a bullshit excuse. even if it did sound like guns n roses people would still hate on axl for being mean to slash. "i would like shacklers revenge if it wasnt called guns n roses" thats the logic we are dealing with here. people are just butthurt over axls possession of the name and use "it doesnt sound like guns n roses" as a way to convey that. nintari talks about subconscious fuckin jealousy, i think the slash fans are the subconsciously jealous ones. jealous over axls possession of the name and his position of gatekeeper for a gnr reunion. what are axl fans jealous over? slashs solo album? lol.i have no problem with axl using the name. i dont buy into the axl bad - slash good bullshit. i think they have both done some very sketchy, and some very cool things. i think CD is a real gnr record, its in the spirit of gnr, so i really have no problem with that. plus, bucket was an upgrade on slash so things only improved 1996>2001.Couldnt have said it better myself.I could. Buckethead wasn't an upgrade. The general public viewed him as a freak show. Looks aside, his guitar work on Chinese Democracy had zero impact on rock music. It is already irrelevant. He had the greatest front man in the industry and still couldn't make himself relevant. Buckethead is an excellent guitarist, but he is better suited for his underground cult following. Not GNR. Buckethead is technically superior to Slash but that doesn't mean he's an upgrade. We don't want Buckethead in the Rolling Stones either, ya know?people who hate on the new band, some just plain dont like the music, and thats fair, but there are a lot more who just feel axl is bad, slash good, and that justify hating axl / new gnr because slash is the cool / good one and what axl did was wrong / unfair. people will say "it doesn't sound like guns n roses" but thats a bullshit excuse. even if it did sound like guns n roses people would still hate on axl for being mean to slash. "i would like shacklers revenge if it wasnt called guns n roses" thats the logic we are dealing with here. people are just butthurt over axls possession of the name and use "it doesnt sound like guns n roses" as a way to convey that. nintari talks about subconscious fuckin jealousy, i think the slash fans are the subconsciously jealous ones. jealous over axls possession of the name and his position of gatekeeper for a gnr reunion. what are axl fans jealous over? slashs solo album? lol.i have no problem with axl using the name. i dont buy into the axl bad - slash good bullshit. i think they have both done some very sketchy, and some very cool things. i think CD is a real gnr record, its in the spirit of gnr, so i really have no problem with that. plus, bucket was an upgrade on slash so things only improved 1996>2001.Couldnt have said it better myself.I could. Buckethead wasn't an upgrade. The general public viewed him as a freak show. Looks aside, his guitar work on Chinese Democracy had zero impact on rock music. It is already irrelevant. He had the greatest front man in the industry and still couldn't make himself relevant. Buckethead is an excellent guitarist, but he is better suited for his underground cult following. Not GNR. Buckethead is technically superior to Slash but that doesn't mean he's an upgrade. We don't want Buckethead in the Rolling Stones either, ya know?Oh, don't even TRY going there. Buckethead maniacs won't buy into the idea that he can't play every single fucking style on the planet. I love Bucket personally, but I'm not delusional enough to know his limitations. Slash OWNS blue based rock. He's right there with Paige,Perry and all the rest. Imo, Bucket owns the whole Satriani/Vai style...and there's really no one close. But people around here don't want to hear that. They're either too delusional in their fanboyism to see it, or know better and just don't want to concede the truth.loljackie barely even mentioned Buckethead in his postway to completely miss the point guys Edited July 7, 2010 by bacardimayne
JungleCat Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 I HATE IT WHEN IDIOTS ORDER EVERYONE TO "DISCUSS." :fuckyou: DISCUSS IT YOURSELF, FUCKTWAT! * GUNS N ROSES - DISCUSSION & NEWSWell, answering the question.... IMO it's because the Guns N' Roses is always associated to Axl and Slash. It's like Plant and Page, Bon Jovi and Sambora.... fortunately this is changing.What I still ask myself is that if Slash would be the owner of the name today, and still used it, would people complain today like they complain about Axl? I don't think so. Slash is full of this politics skills, he would launch record after record, using the same and old hard rock formula. He still uses it today...I wasn't even gonna comment in this thread till I just read your post. I wouldn't call what $la$h is doing any type of "skill" - he's turned into a sell out media whore. On the other hand...Anyone who thinks that Guns N' Roses would be anything w/o Axl is deluding themselves.Just saying.
Lines&Noses Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 I HATE IT WHEN IDIOTS ORDER EVERYONE TO "DISCUSS." :fuckyou: DISCUSS IT YOURSELF, FUCKTWAT! * GUNS N ROSES - DISCUSSION & NEWSWell, answering the question.... IMO it's because the Guns N' Roses is always associated to Axl and Slash. It's like Plant and Page, Bon Jovi and Sambora.... fortunately this is changing.What I still ask myself is that if Slash would be the owner of the name today, and still used it, would people complain today like they complain about Axl? I don't think so. Slash is full of this politics skills, he would launch record after record, using the same and old hard rock formula. He still uses it today...I wasn't even gonna comment in this thread till I just read your post. I wouldn't call what $la$h is doing any type of "skill" - he's turned into a sell out media whore. On the other hand...Anyone who thinks that Guns N' Roses would be anything w/o Axl is deluding themselves.Just saying.I agree GnR without Axl don;t make sense but I don't think the band will ever recover its creativity and indeed productivity wihout Slash and the other original members.The original member were more than the sum of their parts. None have them have come close to matching what they did together.
Graveyard Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 (edited) if in the year 2010 people still have a problem with Guns N" Roses the way it is, they should seek professional help.if you can't get over the fact that some fucking guy in a fucking top hat left 15 years ago, i dont know what to tell you. Edited July 7, 2010 by Graveyard
Jakey Styley Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 people who hate on the new band, some just plain dont like the music, and thats fair, but there are a lot more who just feel axl is bad, slash good, and that justify hating axl / new gnr because slash is the cool / good one and what axl did was wrong / unfair. people will say "it doesn't sound like guns n roses" but thats a bullshit excuse. even if it did sound like guns n roses people would still hate on axl for being mean to slash. "i would like shacklers revenge if it wasnt called guns n roses" thats the logic we are dealing with here. people are just butthurt over axls possession of the name and use "it doesnt sound like guns n roses" as a way to convey that. nintari talks about subconscious fuckin jealousy, i think the slash fans are the subconsciously jealous ones. jealous over axls possession of the name and his position of gatekeeper for a gnr reunion. what are axl fans jealous over? slashs solo album? lol.i have no problem with axl using the name. i dont buy into the axl bad - slash good bullshit. i think they have both done some very sketchy, and some very cool things. i think CD is a real gnr record, its in the spirit of gnr, so i really have no problem with that. plus, bucket was an upgrade on slash so things only improved 1996>2001.Couldnt have said it better myself.I could. Buckethead wasn't an upgrade. The general public viewed him as a freak show. Looks aside, his guitar work on Chinese Democracy had zero impact on rock music. It is already irrelevant. He had the greatest front man in the industry and still couldn't make himself relevant. Buckethead is an excellent guitarist, but he is better suited for his underground cult following. Not GNR. Buckethead is technically superior to Slash but that doesn't mean he's an upgrade. We don't want Buckethead in the Rolling Stones either, ya know?Oh, don't even TRY going there. Buckethead maniacs won't buy into the idea that he can't play every single fucking style on the planet. I love Bucket personally, but I'm not delusional enough to know his limitations. Slash OWNS blue based rock. He's right there with Paige,Perry and all the rest. Imo, Bucket owns the whole Satriani/Vai style...and there's really no one close. But people around here don't want to hear that. They're either too delusional in their fanboyism to see it, or know better and just don't want to concede the truth.SLASHKID FIGHT
Graeme Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 if in the year 2010 people still have a problem with Guns N" Roses the way it is, they should seek professional help.if you can't get over the fact that some fucking guy in a fucking top hat left 15 years ago, i dont know what to tell you.I agree completely with this.
Graveyard Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 if in the year 2010 people still have a problem with Guns N" Roses the way it is, they should seek professional help.if you can't get over the fact that some fucking guy in a fucking top hat left 15 years ago, i dont know what to tell you.I agree completely with this.not saying they have to like it or whatever. but to come here kicking and pouting everyday does absolutely nothing.
Lines&Noses Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 if in the year 2010 people still have a problem with Guns N" Roses the way it is, they should seek professional help.if you can't get over the fact that some fucking guy in a fucking top hat left 15 years ago, i dont know what to tell you.Well you say that but it wasn;t just some guy but a lynch pin of the band. The band has done very little since the guy in the top hat left.Given that the band were more productive and imo creating better music when they were together I don't htink its "crazy" to want a reunion?Maybe Axl really does have some big guns that he's holding back but on the strength of what we have heard so far I don't think the new band will ever match the old one musically.A Love Axl and I Love Slash (as well as Izzy, Duff and Steven). I hate to see them each stuggle of their own.
Graeme Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 if in the year 2010 people still have a problem with Guns N" Roses the way it is, they should seek professional help.if you can't get over the fact that some fucking guy in a fucking top hat left 15 years ago, i dont know what to tell you.Well you say that but it wasn;t just some guy but a lynch pin of the band. The band has done very little since the guy in the top hat left.Given that the band were more productive and imo creating better music when they were together I don't htink its "crazy" to want a reunion?Maybe Axl really does have some big guns that he's holding back but on the strength of what we have heard so far I don't think the new band will ever match the old one musically.A Love Axl and I Love Slash (as well as Izzy, Duff and Steven). I hate to see them each stuggle of their own.it was never implied that it's unacceptable to want a reunion, but there are people (not necessartily yourself) who feel the need to try and make those who like the direction the band has moved in feel like inferior fans and constantly talk down to them. There is a section on the forum for talking about the pre-1994 band and another. for people, like yourself who want a reunion. Talk of wanting Slash, or whoever back in the band doesn't belong here, I'm not saying this section should be some sort of sunshine and rainbows golden haven for folk who believe Axl is the way, the truth and the light, but it should be for folk who want to support the band to be able to do so without anyone attempting to make them feel inferior for it. I guess the truth of the matter for those who do this is, a reunion will never happen and baiting those who do not want one as some sort of bitter game will change fuck all, so for those who do it, ultimately I guess the joke's on you.
Ed Vega Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 One album in 17 years? I think the joke is on all of us
Fogy Malone Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 if in the year 2010 people still have a problem with Guns N" Roses the way it is, they should seek professional help.if you can't get over the fact that some fucking guy in a fucking top hat left 15 years ago, i dont know what to tell you.These nut cases that want the old band back are probably beyond professional help!Why would anyone in their right mind want one of the greatest bands of all time to make more music together?Especially when there is a perfectly good band masquerading as them!
Nintari Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 if in the year 2010 people still have a problem with Guns N" Roses the way it is, they should seek professional help.if you can't get over the fact that some fucking guy in a fucking top hat left 15 years ago, i dont know what to tell you.I agree completely with this.not saying they have to like it or whatever. but to come here kicking and pouting everyday does absolutely nothing.You obviously fail to understand how much of an impact Guns N Roses had in their day. This happens with ANY legendary band...Nirvana,The Beatles...Zepplin...etc.
bacardimayne Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 (edited) if in the year 2010 people still have a problem with Guns N" Roses the way it is, they should seek professional help.if you can't get over the fact that some fucking guy in a fucking top hat left 15 years ago, i dont know what to tell you.I agree completely with this.not saying they have to like it or whatever. but to come here kicking and pouting everyday does absolutely nothing.You obviously fail to understand how much of an impact Guns N Roses had in their day. This happens with ANY legendary band...Nirvana,The Beatles...Zepplin...etc.who gives a shitit was 20 years agoit's just a fucking band nameget over it Edited July 7, 2010 by bacardimayne
Nintari Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 if in the year 2010 people still have a problem with Guns N" Roses the way it is, they should seek professional help.if you can't get over the fact that some fucking guy in a fucking top hat left 15 years ago, i dont know what to tell you.I agree completely with this.not saying they have to like it or whatever. but to come here kicking and pouting everyday does absolutely nothing.You obviously fail to understand how much of an impact Guns N Roses had in their day. This happens with ANY legendary band...Nirvana,The Beatles...Zepplin...etc.who gives a shitit was 20 years agoit's just a fucking band nameget over itRight, but as I said, with any band as big as they were, you have the same shit. This isn't unique to Guns N Roses.
bacardimayne Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 if in the year 2010 people still have a problem with Guns N" Roses the way it is, they should seek professional help.if you can't get over the fact that some fucking guy in a fucking top hat left 15 years ago, i dont know what to tell you.I agree completely with this.not saying they have to like it or whatever. but to come here kicking and pouting everyday does absolutely nothing.You obviously fail to understand how much of an impact Guns N Roses had in their day. This happens with ANY legendary band...Nirvana,The Beatles...Zepplin...etc.who gives a shitit was 20 years agoit's just a fucking band nameget over itRight, but as I said, with any band as big as they were, you have the same shit. This isn't unique to Guns N Roses.What's "the same shit" you're talking about? GNR is in a pretty unique situation right now.
Nintari Posted July 7, 2010 Posted July 7, 2010 if in the year 2010 people still have a problem with Guns N" Roses the way it is, they should seek professional help.if you can't get over the fact that some fucking guy in a fucking top hat left 15 years ago, i dont know what to tell you.I agree completely with this.not saying they have to like it or whatever. but to come here kicking and pouting everyday does absolutely nothing.You obviously fail to understand how much of an impact Guns N Roses had in their day. This happens with ANY legendary band...Nirvana,The Beatles...Zepplin...etc.who gives a shitit was 20 years agoit's just a fucking band nameget over itRight, but as I said, with any band as big as they were, you have the same shit. This isn't unique to Guns N Roses.What's "the same shit" you're talking about? GNR is in a pretty unique situation right now.I mean as far as passionate, over the top and emotional fans saying and doing crazy shit.
Recommended Posts