You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Guns N' Roses Live From Rock In Rio
the posts stated that the gig was a write off from the get go...i disagreed then and still do....def wasnt the best but i dont htink it was as terrible as some made it out to be...its was ok...it was good
would i ever watch it again? no...but i normally dont...i'd watch this gig agin before i watched Tokyo agian though i've always thought that hte tokyo dvds (i actually have the VHS 
) were crap...some peoepl think they are the shit though
Re: Guns N' Roses Live From Rock In Rio
the posts stated that the gig was a write off from the get go...i disagreed then and still do....def wasnt the best but i dont htink it was as terrible as some made it out to be...its was ok...it was good
would i ever watch it again? no...but i normally dont...i'd watch this gig agin before i watched Tokyo agian though i've always thought that hte tokyo dvds (i actually have the VHS
The Tokyo shows are lame. No energy, no atmopshere and I believe that's based on how they were filmed. The performances as a whole though destroy what we saw in RIR the other night they were just terribly shot concerts in my opinion. RIR was a much better show from a film perspective.
Re: Guns N' Roses Live From Rock In Rio
the posts stated that the gig was a write off from the get go...i disagreed then and still do....def wasnt the best but i dont htink it was as terrible as some made it out to be...its was ok...it was good
would i ever watch it again? no...but i normally dont...i'd watch this gig agin before i watched Tokyo agian though i've always thought that hte tokyo dvds (i actually have the VHS
I never was a big fan of the Tokyo '92 show either. So we're agreed on that.
Like Rio IV, the main highlight of that show was a virtually flawless live performance of Estranged (which I never really thought transferred live well, ala TWAT, 'cause it was so complex).
Chicago '92 should've been the DVD's released.
Re: Guns N' Roses Live From Rock In Rio
Whoa. 128 pages.
Kudos to all of you guys. Despite how many heated words are exchanged in this thread or elsewhere, you all definitely have a passion for this band and the material they present us with.
To sum up: Estranged was rad, and everybody obviously wanted the rest of the show to be on par with that. Not only because it was THE big show, but because this lineup this lineup has the chops to take a classic like that and do a pitch-perfect rendition of what made the UYI-era GNR the biggest band in the world.
At least during that one song, I looked past Axl's age, stormtrooper helmets, mumbled lyrics, hissy fits and whatever. They rocked on that, and they rocked hard.
Axl, please. Let this band grow, they're good enough to carry you.
Re: Guns N' Roses Live From Rock In Rio
Regarding "success", well, apart from the performance obviously. Every factor contributed to RIR being a failure.
I truly don't give a rats ass how good The General is. I could be worse than Silk Worms and I would still be pleased because he actually had the balls to do new songs. That's what I'm here for. Neither band created Estranged or The General, but they could get away with doing The General much easier than doing Estranged, no matter how good it is and how much of a trip it was listening to it.
Re: Guns N' Roses Live From Rock In Rio
DCK wrote:A successfull show would have been Estranged, Oh My God and three new songs. It's as easy as that. That would have been a success, and I would nutswing as hard as I never nutswinged before.
I honestly don't get all the clamoring for new material.
Really? Want me to explain it to you?
Re: Guns N' Roses Live From Rock In Rio
russtcb wrote:DCK wrote:A successfull show would have been Estranged, Oh My God and three new songs. It's as easy as that. That would have been a success, and I would nutswing as hard as I never nutswinged before.
I honestly don't get all the clamoring for new material.
Really? Want me to explain it to you?
Please do, and make it EPIC
