2002 Appearance and Band Reception

[Guest Len B'stard]

I think if the current band was what he came out with in 2002, Axl would have gotten way more shit for a punk bass player, guy in a top hat playing a Les Paul while smoking, and some guy who looks like a jacked up Izzy

agreed.

I feel like having the group of guys he had, with the various looks they had, was intentional and necessary

I don't agree, i don't think Axl gives a shit about their image, just the way they played. Cuz, honestly, it's one thing to fuckin make a concious departure from an image but...fuckin hell, a KFC chicken bucket is like...y'know, a bit too far out if image awareness played a part I don't think Axl thinks along them lines and if it is the case i respect him for it.

[Changes]

Absolutely positive that Axl and GN'R would be more respected today if the band in 2002 wouldn't have had that freak image. Axl's own image was also a problem but I think it was enhanced by the rest of the band.

[Tonyp44]

1986>1992>2010>2002

2002 was the worst line up period. They did not mesh well while they are all great muscians. You can't just through someone in a band like buckethead I could tell from the start he had his own agenda and used gnr to get his name out.

[RandallFlagg]

He might have upgraded his public profile but he damned well made some great music with Axl regardless, I think his agenda was the music, if it was good he would get his name out, if it wasn't very good he'd have been called a mere freak and not a freak with talent lol.

[Guest Len B'stard]

1986>1992>2010>2002

2002 was the worst line up period. They did not mesh well while they are all great muscians. You can't just through someone in a band like buckethead I could tell from the start he had his own agenda and used gnr to get his name out.

This, i think, is absolute bullshit. I mean, what has being in GnR done for his profile? Jack shit, it's not like he's filling out stadiums now. If anything he might've lost himself some hipster cred. Bucketheads a true original.

[Aussiegun]

Yep, freakshow.

I doubt that even if CD had've dropped in 2002, and had some serious hits, that the then lineup would've restored the GNR brand.

None of those guys were close to accessible to any forms of media. What we have now is Ashba/Bumble as a combo that engages the crowd greatly and does well with the fans when not on stage. Dizzy/Stinson/Axl have also been in interviews, which keeps the group rolling in the medias eye.

I feel that in 2006, Axl was on a one man mission to not let the band/brand go under. Applying himself that way to 2002 or 2010 on and we have a whole new beast. Id say the way that the record company fucked him around just knocked the stuffing out of him. Hopefully 2012 is the completion of the revival.

[cassette tape hiss]

The 2002 lineup looked like an actual band. It was Axl's unrecognizable voice that let them all down. They actually had a shot at being accepted if they had manged to release an album. In all honesty, Buckethead is the only guitar player Axl's had that could have really replaced Slash in a meaningful way. And Robin had his own unique style and playing too, but he wasn't quite technical enough to fill Slash's role.

That's a good answer. He responded to what the questions were. I just don't know about the voice part. Currently, he sounds like he did in 2002 about 75% of the time, yet they're getting positive tour reviews. If this band premiered in 2002, would the reviews still have been good or would the shock that it's not the original 5 outweigh the performances?

The 2002 lineup debuted live with songs like The Blues and Madagascar that made me believe in them. Right now we haven't heard anything written and recorded by the current lineup, so I don't necessarily feel a connection with them at all.

True.

I just wonder if the appearance of the band in 2002, like Buckethead and Finck then, weighed in on how people received the newer stuff then. When people went and said "wow, that's a freakshow" because the band looked so different, did they say "I don't like the new songs" in correlation? And if the 2006/2010 band debuted then (but with the same 2002 sound), would the more normal/casual rock appearance and show had a different correlation to the new songs? If the image was more of a rock image then instead of the industrial Finck and whatnot, would the shows have been seen differently? I've worded it like four different ways, but I'm asking the same thing. It's just a "what if?" scenario to talk about instead of stuff that has been rehashed a lot. I hope it's understandable.

And the new songs were well received by many Guns fans, but a lot of the reviews I remember reading talked about getting drinks during the new ones and how the show slowed down when they were played.

i loved the new songs in 2002 but seeing the seeing the band for the first time shocked the everlivig shit out of me. i still think of it as one of the most shocking moments in rock n roll. i love the guys and it's obvious that they were a great band.......to answer your question though, i bet even if axl had hired a more normal looking crew public opinion would have probably been the same. people just love the original.

[CivilWar07]

Never got the 2002 band look and honestly think the current band and style is GNR as it should be.

I liked Finks 2006 Jesus look but was a sloppy player live. Bucket was a joke to look at but was good

[batman007]

If the 2002 lineup had released Better as the first single in 2002 or 2003 it would have been on.

I think so.

[DaneisKing1389]

Interesting responses in the thread. Everybody has hit everything that was going through my mind.

I personally think that the image was definitely a factor into why the 2002 lineup wasn't as well received. If they had the same exact sound but had a more put-together rock image, I think it would've helped a little. But ultimately, it was going to take time to push through that "this isn't the Guns we know" thing and into their own.

I wouldn't change in initial line-up though, as I don't think we'd have Chinese Democracy sounding the way it does. I really do love that album.

If the 2002 lineup had released Better as the first single in 2002 or 2003 it would have been on.

I think so.

I forgot that they really didn't play much new until 2006. Only a stripped/watered down version of Chinese Democracy, The Blues, and the best Madagascars.

Edited January 7, 2012 by DaneisKing1389

[watchman]

2002 was my favourite lineup ever. I loved how they sounded, the mix of styles and personalities blending into something dark, expressive and unique. It was actual art, not just a brand.

I remember the majority of the fanbase taking the piss at "weirdo" Buckethead for playing with "no feeling", mainly just because he wasn't playing blues scales all the time like almost every other guitarist out there. And the one who WAS playing blues - Robin Finck - was not appreciated either, largely for not sounding and playing exactly like Slash. The fact that he plays and sounds like David Gilmour on ecstasy doesn't matter - he didn't sound like Slash, so why pay attention? Besides, most of the Guns "fanbase" doesn't even know who David Gilmour is anyway.

Those people must either be forever stuck in the 80's/90's (hence the ongoing reunion or Axl/Cobain debates - do you ever live TODAY or what?) or spoonfed whatever they consider "art" or "rock and roll" according to the distorted picture the media has painted in their conditioned and sedated minds. Unfortunately, the majority of Guns audience is like that. They want "It's So Easy", not "Breakdown". They want "Scraped", not "Catcher In The Rye". Those people are the reason for mainstream music sucking ass. And it's those people who brought us American Idol, Lady Gaga and DJ Cashba. I've been to many Guns shows and I would not want to have a chat or a beer with 90% of the fellow audience ever. If Guns made a Karma check at their shows, they'd be playing to 100 people per night.

Now more people are praising both Robin Finck and Buckethead because they think they finally "get" them. They will never get them as long as they waste valuable lifetime with DJ Ashba and Ron "The Tom Cruise Of Rock" Thal. The biggest achievement of DJ Ashba in Guns so far was probably to show everyone the balls, spine and greatness of Robin Finck and in that the difference between an true artist and a run of the mill poser. And the biggest thing Ron will ever do in Guns is being the approachable next door dude who can play guitar. Great. Is that what you go to a show for, what you want to look up to, waht axctually INSPIRES? I don't think so, unless you lead a truly piss poor life. I have to cut these guys some serious slack though for the patience with Axl and for sticking around for such an unworthy fanbase full of idiots.

Sorry for the rant but 2002 is ten fucking years ago and where are now with this band? It's over. It's beyond over. And it makes me sad because I love this band and what it once stood for. But the reality is Axl is the captain of a sinking ship. And not much else.

Appreciate what is now, warm yourself to the fire rather than contemplating the fucking ashes, because, at the end of the day, that's all we do round here. What a waste of energy.

[DaneisKing1389]

2002 was my favourite lineup ever. I loved how they sounded, the mix of styles and personalities blending into something dark, expressive and unique. It was actual art, not just a brand.

I remember the majority of the fanbase taking the piss at "weirdo" Buckethead for playing with "no feeling", mainly just because he wasn't playing blues scales all the time like almost every other guitarist out there. And the one who WAS playing blues - Robin Finck - was not appreciated either, largely for not sounding and playing exactly like Slash. The fact that he plays and sounds like David Gilmour on ecstasy doesn't matter - he didn't sound like Slash, so why pay attention? Besides, most of the Guns "fanbase" doesn't even know who David Gilmour is anyway.

Those people must either be forever stuck in the 80's/90's (hence the ongoing reunion or Axl/Cobain debates - do you ever live TODAY or what?) or spoonfed whatever they consider "art" or "rock and roll" according to the distorted picture the media has painted in their conditioned and sedated minds. Unfortunately, the majority of Guns audience is like that. They want "It's So Easy", not "Breakdown". They want "Scraped", not "Catcher In The Rye". Those people are the reason for mainstream music sucking ass. And it's those people who brought us American Idol, Lady Gaga and DJ Cashba. I've been to many Guns shows and I would not want to have a chat or a beer with 90% of the fellow audience ever. If Guns made a Karma check at their shows, they'd be playing to 100 people per night.

Now more people are praising both Robin Finck and Buckethead because they think they finally "get" them. They will never get them as long as they waste valuable lifetime with DJ Ashba and Ron "The Tom Cruise Of Rock" Thal. The biggest achievement of DJ Ashba in Guns so far was probably to show everyone the balls, spine and greatness of Robin Finck and in that the difference between an true artist and a run of the mill poser. And the biggest thing Ron will ever do in Guns is being the approachable next door dude who can play guitar. Great. Is that what you go to a show for, what you want to look up to, waht axctually INSPIRES? I don't think so, unless you lead a truly piss poor life. I have to cut these guys some serious slack though for the patience with Axl and for sticking around for such an unworthy fanbase full of idiots.

Sorry for the rant but 2002 is ten fucking years ago and where are now with this band? It's over. It's beyond over. And it makes me sad because I love this band and what it once stood for. But the reality is Axl is the captain of a sinking ship. And not much else.

Appreciate what is now, warm yourself to the fire rather than contemplating the fucking ashes, because, at the end of the day, that's all we do round here. What a waste of energy.

[axlsalinger]

2002 was my favourite lineup ever. I loved how they sounded, the mix of styles and personalities blending into something dark, expressive and unique. It was actual art, not just a brand.

I remember the majority of the fanbase taking the piss at "weirdo" Buckethead for playing with "no feeling", mainly just because he wasn't playing blues scales all the time like almost every other guitarist out there. And the one who WAS playing blues - Robin Finck - was not appreciated either, largely for not sounding and playing exactly like Slash. The fact that he plays and sounds like David Gilmour on ecstasy doesn't matter - he didn't sound like Slash, so why pay attention? Besides, most of the Guns "fanbase" doesn't even know who David Gilmour is anyway.

Those people must either be forever stuck in the 80's/90's (hence the ongoing reunion or Axl/Cobain debates - do you ever live TODAY or what?) or spoonfed whatever they consider "art" or "rock and roll" according to the distorted picture the media has painted in their conditioned and sedated minds. Unfortunately, the majority of Guns audience is like that. They want "It's So Easy", not "Breakdown". They want "Scraped", not "Catcher In The Rye". Those people are the reason for mainstream music sucking ass. And it's those people who brought us American Idol, Lady Gaga and DJ Cashba. I've been to many Guns shows and I would not want to have a chat or a beer with 90% of the fellow audience ever. If Guns made a Karma check at their shows, they'd be playing to 100 people per night.

Now more people are praising both Robin Finck and Buckethead because they think they finally "get" them. They will never get them as long as they waste valuable lifetime with DJ Ashba and Ron "The Tom Cruise Of Rock" Thal. The biggest achievement of DJ Ashba in Guns so far was probably to show everyone the balls, spine and greatness of Robin Finck and in that the difference between an true artist and a run of the mill poser. And the biggest thing Ron will ever do in Guns is being the approachable next door dude who can play guitar. Great. Is that what you go to a show for, what you want to look up to, waht axctually INSPIRES? I don't think so, unless you lead a truly piss poor life. I have to cut these guys some serious slack though for the patience with Axl and for sticking around for such an unworthy fanbase full of idiots.

Sorry for the rant but 2002 is ten fucking years ago and where are now with this band? It's over. It's beyond over. And it makes me sad because I love this band and what it once stood for. But the reality is Axl is the captain of a sinking ship. And not much else.

Appreciate what is now, warm yourself to the fire rather than contemplating the fucking ashes, because, at the end of the day, that's all we do round here. What a waste of energy.

Let me just make sure we got your argument down pat. Pretty much all GNR fans are idiots - the hardcore fans, and the casual fans. People who like the new band are idiots. People who like the 2002 band "now" are idiots. People who don't like Guns are idiots, and people who like other bands are idiots. And watchman is truly 'one in a million' standing out in a sea of idiots. Oh, and the majority of GNR fans are apparently dying to hear 'Scraped'.

Does that about sum it up?

[Kid A]

I don't know. I felt like it was a sad attempt at being something that they weren't.

Granted, they could have given the correct circumstances become something phenomenal, but Finck didn't have his heart into it, Axl was a total lunatic, and Bucket was well... Bucket.

I'm surprised they managed to cut Chinese D at all tbh. That band was destined to crash and burn.

The new lineup is more your typical classic rock show looking group, and is lacking that element of weird, unusual, unique, but what has struck me as great about this lineup is all the members seem to be in very good spirits and having fun, something I noticed was missing in the earlier lineups. I mean hell, tommy is smiling, interacting with the fans, did an interview, Bumble survived the entire tour and managed to put on great shows for the fans considering the circumstances, and let's not forget Axl, who has shown up to every show, done interviews, and has generally be in great spirits.

I never got a very 'happy' vibe from the past line ups, so I will gladly take this new lineup which is very productive and energetic, over the old experimental wanna be group.

[phaeryen]

This comparison will have to ignore the band's playing and Axl's singing for the most part. Base it on the appearance/people...

It was an attempt to make the bands image into sort of comic figure like thing. It would have gone down better had the whole thing stayed together more and such.

It wasn't a very original thing to do either.

take a look at U2 during their "Pop" album era, exactly the same thing.

worked great for them.

[Georgy Zhukov]

If the 2011 lineup gets us an album by 2013 I will enjoy them more than 2002

[watchman]

And watchman is truly 'one in a million' standing out in a sea of idiots.

Does that about sum it up?

What if I am one in a million and accepted myself that way, out of the majority, not part of a concept. Free. Will you label me insane, not part of the community, not worthy of anyones attention then? Or will you just let me be and practise the concept of "my liife is as valuable as yours" that you are implying to support with your passive agressive reaction towards my not so liberal attitude? Whenever someone uses "one in a million" the way you do, it comes across as if they heard "we're all equal", "can't argue taste" and "everyone's opinion matters as much as the other one" so often that they started to believe the concept of democracy. But that very concept is the source of evil where leaders have to follow and the good and strong have to assimilate down to the bad and weak in order to survive, not the other way around. The truth is, there is only light or darkness, right or wrong, illusion or reality, creation or construction. People are free to choose and for most this is simply too much, so they go with something in between, the shades of grey that make us all sick. So what if I am one in a million? Will you take that chance or just let it pass like so many other chances in your life? What does one in a million actually mean to you?

[Kid A]

A tad dramatic

[axlsalinger]

And watchman is truly 'one in a million' standing out in a sea of idiots.

Does that about sum it up?

What if I am one in a million and accepted myself that way, out of the majority, not part of a concept. Free. Will you label me insane, not part of the community, not worthy of anyones attention then? Or will you just let me be and practise the concept of "my liife is as valuable as yours" that you are implying to support with your passive agressive reaction towards my not so liberal attitude? Whenever someone uses "one in a million" the way you do, it comes across as if they heard "we're all equal", "can't argue taste" and "everyone's opinion matters as much as the other one" so often that they started to believe the concept of democracy. But that very concept is the source of evil where leaders have to follow and the good and strong have to assimilate down to the bad and weak in order to survive, not the other way around. The truth is, there is only light or darkness, right or wrong, illusion or reality, creation or construction. People are free to choose and for most this is simply too much, so they go with something in between, the shades of grey that make us all sick. So what if I am one in a million? Will you take that chance or just let it pass like so many other chances in your life? What does one in a million actually mean to you?

Well first of all, it was a joke, an in-joke if you will where only GNR fans would get the reference. Secondly, I am not suggesting that all opinions are created equal. There are stupid people and there are smart people. and there are lots with average-intelligence, and everywhere in between. It's not a matter of "all people are equal", when in reality no two people in the world are exactly equal. As for yourself, I don't know anything about you. Maybe you truly are one in a million (or one in six billion) and people will sing songs about your great deeds a hundred years from now. Or maybe your deeds have a long way to go to catch up to your ego, and you're just another guy taking easy potshots at DJ Ashba.

I don't agree with the overall argument of your post, and definitely don't agree with the comments about Ron Thal. Certainly Buckethead is a virtuoso, but in addition to being so much more of a "guy next door" as you put it, I am starting to think more and more that Bumble's talent is in the same league as the Bucket. Certainly if you watch pretty much any song from the recent tour, Ron plays all the hardest parts including some very complex Buckethead bits and nails each and every one of 'em. It's hard to say for sure without hearing any GNR songs he's been an essential songwriter or guitarist on, but that has little to do with what he's capable of and everything to do with the fact that he is in a band that never releases songs or albums.

If Guns made a Karma check at their shows, they'd be playing to 100 people per night.

On the one hand, I get this comment. There are lots of idiots out there, or to be more accurate, people who go through life with blinders on and don't have a lot of time to stop and think about things because they get consumed with work, with kids, etc. etc. etc. But I'd say there are certainly way more than 100 cool human beings at every Guns show. I know Axl would prefer to play larger venues and continue to operate as if he is a mega-star, but I was quite surprised in 2002 and continue to be surprised today at how many people turn up at these shows. Anyone who buys a ticket for a GNR show in 2006, or in 2011 should be commended for being cool enough to get out to see Guns n' Roses in a musical atmosphere that encourages people to support the latest trends and bands/singers that get way more press coverage and "cool factor" street cred.

[ITW 2012]

i couldn't disagree with you more. I think the 2002 incarnation looked fantastic. the biggest collection of misfits and weirdoes i've ever come across and it just leant itself to the notion that Axl had been tucked away in the hollywood hills building this fucking Frankensteins monster, fuck the people who thought it was a joke, quite frankly, lots of people thought original Guns was a fucking joke too, when you have a certain kind of iconography that lends a band to being sort of, identifiable, you'll get that sort of thing. I loved the way they looked, it was fantastic, it was like, what the FUCK?!?!

If anything, don't you think if people have a uniform sort of image THAT looks more like hired hands than a bunch of people who all look different? The 02 band didn't look like hired hands or like, y'know, you couldn't fuckin invent that if you tried, robin looking like a fucking ghoul and buckethead looking like...well, buckethead and Tommy Stinson looking like some kind of mid western American take on Johnny Rotten and Axl looking like a fucking cyborg in a football jersey, it was fantastic, it was like a band from the future just beamed down or something.

You nailed it down.

[Kill Devil Hill]

i couldn't disagree with you more. I think the 2002 incarnation looked fantastic. the biggest collection of misfits and weirdoes i've ever come across and it just leant itself to the notion that Axl had been tucked away in the hollywood hills building this fucking Frankensteins monster, fuck the people who thought it was a joke, quite frankly, lots of people thought original Guns was a fucking joke too, when you have a certain kind of iconography that lends a band to being sort of, identifiable, you'll get that sort of thing. I loved the way they looked, it was fantastic, it was like, what the FUCK?!?!

If anything, don't you think if people have a uniform sort of image THAT looks more like hired hands than a bunch of people who all look different? The 02 band didn't look like hired hands or like, y'know, you couldn't fuckin invent that if you tried, robin looking like a fucking ghoul and buckethead looking like...well, buckethead and Tommy Stinson looking like some kind of mid western American take on Johnny Rotten and Axl looking like a fucking cyborg in a football jersey, it was fantastic, it was like a band from the future just beamed down or something.

You nailed it down.

+1

[ITW 2012]

What people don't get is that there was never a way for Axl to replace the old band as they were too iconic. All he could do was reinvent. Kind of like what American Idol did when they brought Steven Tyler and J-Lo on board. The 2002 lineup had different kinds of rock stars whereas today's lineup is made up of mere mortals.

Edited January 7, 2012 by ITW 2012

[DaneisKing1389]

What people don't get is that there was never a way for Axl to replace the old band as they were too iconic. All he could do was reinvent. Kind of like what American Idol did when they brought Steven Tyler and J-Lo on board. The 2002 lineup had different kinds of rock stars whereas today's lineup is made up of mere mortals.

You can reinvent in a less blatant way I would think. He went to the farthest means to rebuild from the ground up. I'm surely glad he did, but I wonder what it would've been like had the appearances stayed grounded in reality.

[themadcaplaughs]

VERY interesting question, and one that I have debated with myself frequently. For starters, I am twenty-one years old, and like most people my age, got into Guns N' Roses through the Greatest Hits album. This would have been about August or September 2004...I knew a tiny bit about the "classic" GN'R lineup. I knew who Axl Rose was, and of course knew the famous pictures of Slash (even if I might not have been able to call him by name). I also remember being vaguely aware of the hype surrounding Velvet Revolver, which had just had pretty big success with Contraband at that point...but for the most part, all I knew was the music. I was completely un-jaded by image, etc. When I went searching on the Internet, the first videos I found of GN'R were from the 2002 tour (at this point, Buckethead was out of the band and the next round of touring was still about two years away). Personally, I was VERY intrigued by this lineup of the band, and it was actually what got me more interested in exploring the older years. However, I soon learned from all my friends who knew more about the band (particularly those who played guitar and thought Slash was the end-all-be-all guitar God) felt this lineup was not "real." Most appreciated the skill Buckethead displayed, but most of my friends felt the (then) current lineup was some kind of weird joke Axl was playing.

Sorry about the long personal rant, but I just thought maybe the views of a fourteen year old discovering Guns N' Roses in that era would be enlightening, but I will now give my opinion as someone who has listened to Guns N' Roses every day since then, read all the books, interviews, and magazine articles, and has heard pretty much every note of music played by EVERY member of the band at any given point.

As other have pointed out, this was the first time a "new" lineup was being debuted since 1993, so naturally some people would be opposed from the get-go. I especially feel this was true of people who had been into the band since the Appetite for Destruction days. However, if you read reviews for some of those early gigs (particularly the House of Blues Show, the Rock in Rio III show, and the Vegas shows in 2001/2002), they were VERY positive: particularly Loder's review of Rock in Rio III. The view seemed to be that although the lineup was strange visually, they could play the old songs with justice while not sounding like a cover band, and the hype surrounding the new songs was big. Even reviews of the VMA show (which all commented on Axl's voice but could not deny the show's energy) and the shows in 2002 were positive, with many pointing out that Axl could still sing well and the band was energetic. Then the cracks started to show...and it became obvious we were not seeing Chinese Democracy anytime soon. AS the tour progressed, you can see the reviews go from "Wow, this band has a lot of potential" to "They really need to start playing some new material to show what the hell Axl has been doing." Once the 2002 tour was cancelled, I think people (unfairly) started to assume it was because the band was not really sturdy, and was more of a gimmick that failed.

Sorry for such a long response, and to answer the OP question shortly, I feel a good number of people were just close-minded to a new lineup, something that would have happened even if the 2009-2011 lineup was playing. Others, however, kept an open mind and saw a lot of potential, and were willing to accept this was a different band trying to capture the same spirit as the original, but a lot of negativity towards the horrible ending of the 2001-2002 era was placed on the band...riots, Axl's "look" at the time, the bizarre rants, and of course the lack of substantial material from Chinese Democracy.

Now, I still feel image definitely has a part of things. People were definitely hard on Finck in 2002, but seemed more accepting of him in 2006. While there was always complaints of his "sloppy" playing, people seemed to accept him more when he looked like a "traditional" rock star (i.e. long hair and ZZ Top beard). When Bumblefoot joined in 2006, fans just saw him as another faceless shredder replacing Buckethead and tore him a new asshole over minor mistakes (i.e. messing up the "There was a Time" solo). On the other hand, when DJ Ashba, a completely unoriginal guitar player and overall tool, stepped up in 2009, people were all over him, despite the fact that he massacred solos MUCH worse than Bumbelfoot or Robin at some of his first shows. What was the difference? DJ looked more like the "caricature" of rock music and therefore I feel people responded better to him.

Edited January 8, 2012 by themadcaplaughs

[smokingarthur]

2002 band looked like a freakshow to the average non-fanatical fanboy. They put a great album together and I can't wait to hear more but I'm glad that we have the band that we currently do.

When I go back and watch the old videos with Buckethead I kinda wish that band could have made it. I don't think of it as a freakshow anymore. It just looks fucking cool to me.