You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame
Yeah but that's my point. It's unavoidable. There's nothing any of them can do about that.
Axl & Slash are the faces of the franchise. Period.
That's like you going up to somebody on the street, and asking them who played 2B for the Red Sox during the 2004 World Series.
They're not gonna have a fucking clue it was Mark Bellhorn.
They're gonna either say Manny & Papi, or Papi & Schilling or something like that.
Axl & Slash being the faces is just the way it is. Izzy & Duff knew that mold was cast back in the early 90's, when people would just leave them mid-conversation to get Axl or Slash's autograph.
- tejastech08
- Rep: 194
Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame
The Hall will play up that the last real rock band is going into the Hall. And that means the singer/guitarist thing will be played up.
Really sad that this is even the case, but it's true. Rock is fucking dead. The situation is even more dire right now than it was when GN'R hit the scene. At least back then you had pop posing as rock in the form of hair metal. Now it's just pop and rap. 
Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame
One could argue the appeal of Nirvana & Pearl Jam, but they never had that stadium, bigger than life, rule the world rock band aspect. In fact they kinda rebelled AGAINST it.
GN'R embraced it, and say what you want about Vedder vocally and lyrically, but everyone knows this...
Axl Rose was and is the last rock frontman to the roam the earth.
Slash was the last great icon guitarist to roam the earth.
After this, they'll be able to induct the "artsy" grunge movement, and once that 3-year period after GN'R... it's fuckin' done man. They'll have to go backwards to find artists, or they'll have to start inducting people like "Eminem" into the "Rock" Hall of Fame.
Who the fuck are they gonna acknowledge? They're gonna have to go backwards and start giving it to KISS, Rush, Heart, etc. The ones that didn't make it.
You know how embarrassing it'd be for them to induct fucking Creed & Linkin Park in there?
I'd personally fly to Cleveland, just to go in there and piss on their section.
- Communist China
- Rep: 130
Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame
Does anybody really know or care who's in the RnR Hall of Fame? I can't say I know a single person who has ever brought it up to me except a Bon Jovi fan, once. I vaguely remember there being a bunch of acts in there that are neither famed nor rock n roll already, but more to my point, I don't even care to look it up. The only intrigue the nomination ever has had is the Slash/Axl contact it could spark.
- tejastech08
- Rep: 194
Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame
After this, they'll be able to induct the "artsy" grunge movement, and once that 3-year period after GN'R... it's fuckin' done man.
Yep, once Nirvana, Rage Against The Machine, Alice In Chains, Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, Smashing Pumpkins, and possibly STP get in, it's fuckin' over. When they start inducting bullshit like Backstreet Boys, Britney Spears, and Eminem every year, you might as well change the name of it since it's no longer the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. I know there are some rap and pop artists already in there, but look at the last 15 years. It's been completely dominated by those genres while rock is deader than it's ever been.
I guess there is one positive about the future lack of worthy rock artists to be inducted. Like you said, it will force them to go back and let the passover artists in that should already be there. Just off the top of my head...
Deep Purple
KISS
Rush
Iron Maiden
Judas Priest
Heart
Paul Rodgers
Ronnie James Dio
Motorhead
The Cure
The Replacements
New York Dolls
Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame
One could argue the appeal of Nirvana & Pearl Jam, but they never had that stadium, bigger than life, rule the world rock band aspect. In fact they kinda rebelled AGAINST it.
GN'R embraced it, and say what you want about Vedder vocally and lyrically, but everyone knows this...
Axl Rose was and is the last rock frontman to the roam the earth.
Slash was the last great icon guitarist to roam the earth.
After this, they'll be able to induct the "artsy" grunge movement, and once that 3-year period after GN'R... it's fuckin' done man. They'll have to go backwards to find artists, or they'll have to start inducting people like "Eminem" into the "Rock" Hall of Fame.
Who the fuck are they gonna acknowledge? They're gonna have to go backwards and start giving it to KISS, Rush, Heart, etc. The ones that didn't make it.
You know how embarrassing it'd be for them to induct fucking Creed & Linkin Park in there?
I'd personally fly to Cleveland, just to go in there and piss on their section.
Linkin Park in my opinion is a pretty solid band. The best of the new generation of modern rock acts who still have a lot of potential to create great things. Not even close or fair to lump them in with fucking Creed in my opinion.
Nothing wrong with going backwards either in my opinion. They have to in fact. You can't just induct people for the sake of it otherwise Nickelabck is gonna get in. Oh God is Nickleback gonna get in eventually? 
I'd venture to guess Radiohead and Oasis will get in at some point and in my opinion rightfully so. Smashing Pumpkins perhaps and The Pixies. But other than that what's come about since the mid/late 90's? Coldplay? I think going backwards is what they have to do so bands like the ones tejastech08
mentioned get in. I'd also throw Bon Jovi in there as well.
Axl Rose was and is the last rock frontman to the roam the earth.
You'll all disgaree but the world still has Bono. Whether he's a great "rock" frontman or simply a great frontman is up for debate though. He holds his fan base in the palm of his hand the way Axl does and he plays to MUCH LARGER crowds on a regular basis so.... I think I get what you're saying though. I'll admit Bono is a completely different type of frontman than the Axl's, Tyler's, Jager's, Plant's etc etc.
Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame
misterID wrote:There ya go MisterID. "Perception is reality" even according to the RRHOF. We all know what "perception is reality" means and despite the insistane of a few hardcore fans on the internet that the facts are what matter here, the reality is the perception is what people know and believe. The band took a long break and then Axl introduced a completely new band that the world did not recognize or associate as Guns N' Roses.
uh... Never said anything that it wasn't a new line up he introduced. I still call it the new line up. We were talking about 2 very different things.
People will roll their eyes at this comparison but whatever. I find it funny how 2.6 million copies sold world wide for a brand name like Guns N' Roses is being debated as a success by some. So why Guns fans continue to justify 2.6 million as a success I don't get. Why can't you just call a spade a spade. It flopped in terms of sales when you consider the brand name it was attached to.
The brand name GN'R it was attached to started to erode after 1992, even though I know you refuse to accept this point. And it hadn't released an album in 15 years, unlike another one of your ridiculous comparisons to U2, who have been active and have been consistently releasing new music for 30 years, compared to a band with a 6 year run and 15 years between their last album and their new album.
You wanted it to be a flop. It wasn't. It was successful. Those were great numbers for an album today. 
It's cool GN'R is being inducted. No need to bring this thread down anymore.
Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame
You wanted it to be a flop. It wasn't. It was successful. Those were great numbers for an album today.
You seriously are an asshole. I have NEVER said I wanted the album to flop and I have NEVER said I hate the new lineup which you have ignorantly suggested in the past. How about you stop spewing absolute bullshit and making up lies. Seriously it's such a joke when people start making up opinions for others and then state them as fact.
It's cool GN'R is being inducted. No need to bring this thread down anymore.
It's called a discussion and a different view point and if you can't handle that then go to htgth where they all hold hands and sing songs about how amazing every little thing is. Discussing the success or lack of succes of CD is now "bringing down the thread" Wow. Have you even read any of the other discussion that's been going on in this thread or are you just so zoned in on the stuff that doesn't glorify Guns N' Roses to your standards?
Bono wrote:People will roll their eyes at this comparison but whatever. I find it funny how 2.6 million copies sold world wide for a brand name like Guns N' Roses is being debated as a success by some. So why Guns fans continue to justify 2.6 million as a success I don't get. Why can't you just call a spade a spade. It flopped in terms of sales when you consider the brand name it was attached to.
The brand name GN'R it was attached to started to erode after 1992, even though I know you refuse to accept this point. And it hadn't released an album in 15 years, unlike another one of your ridiculous comparisons to U2, who have been active and have been consistently releasing new music for 30 years, compared to a band with a 6 year run and 15 years between their last album and their new album.
People predicted CD to set the world on fire they changed thier tunes only after the album failed to fly off the shelf. 2.6 million world wide for the most anticipated album of all time does not equal a success in terms of sales. Especially considering what went into it. Spin doctors will tell you otherwise but nobody really believes it. It's great you love the album but don't pretend that it was a commercial success cause there is no way in hell it met anybody's expectations on a commercial level.
Oh and Gn'R brand name has eroded since 1992? Yeah ok and depending on the next topic I suppose the Gn'R brand name still carries a lot of weight doesn't it? What ever suits your needs at any given time right? 
The album sold primarily on the brand name... thank god for the brand name.
Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame
misterID wrote:How about this... Not to be an asshole, or anything.... But if you want to see CD as a flop, go right ahead. That's your opinion, man. Put an * by the 2.6 million sold with your own opinion on why you think that.
And I tried to have a very civil conversation here. I wasn't trying to glorify the new line up, just defending it. I haven't called anyone a name, lost my temper, overreacted, jumped down peoples throat who disagreed with me, or went off the deep end, became belligerant or anything else. I tried to have that conversation with you, but you didn't want to discuss it, you just wanted me to agree with you. It was my fault for continuing the covo with you, and yes it dragged down a thread that should be a very cool moment for GN'R. Again, I'll take the blame here and I won't detract from it anymore.
And yes, the band name did start eroding in 1992, at least here in the states. The band name does carry weight today, never denied that. But by no means was GN'R ever close to being what U2 is now.
If you don't hate the new line up great. I'm glad you like it. I really do. I just misunderstood you then, like you misunderstood that I was trying to glorify it or argue they should be inducted into the HOF, or whatever it was you thought I was doing. I don't see 2.6 million albums sold as a failure and I never will. You do. We just disagree. Not the end of the world.
