You are not logged in. Please register or login.

Axlin16
 Rep: 768 

Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame

Axlin16 wrote:

Yeah and Axl can blame all of that on the media. No shows were all a media creation.


Late starts and delays... that's all Axl's fault. And his responses to it, even today are incredibly IMMATURE for a guy his age.

He goes back and forth, but basically "i'll get there when I get there, so deal with it".

-D-
 Rep: 231 

Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame

-D- wrote:
Axlin08 wrote:
-D- wrote:

Well, bon jovi have never been critically acclaimed etc. Their music isn't as deep or what have u as GNR's but If i had to choose which career I'd rather have... I think I'd take Jon's

What people don't realize and what pisses me off is, Jon obviously is doing something right to still be this huge so many years later.

The fact they survived and thrived during grunge alone, should warrant induction. no one else with that style did. Even the mighty Def Leppard got buried.

Well other than GN'R.

GN'R were still incredibly popular worldwide in 1993, despite grunge being in it's zenith of popularity at that time.

The band itself dissolved because it was internally fraught, not because of grunge.


And frankly despite Jon's continued popularity... i'd still take Axl's career.

Think about it... Bon Jovi has had to bust ass to stay where they're at...

Axl Rose can play a fuckin' solo show called Guns N' Roses, and STILL fuckin' headline Rock In fuckin' Rio? With people screaming for November Rain, his last significant hit?

Granted Jon can play shows in New York, sell out, and have people screaming his name for Wanted: Dead Or Alive, but he's continued to work.


GN'R is the laziest job in the entire world, which is what makes it even more absurd that more studio material doesn't exist from them, whether old band or just Axl.

If I knew i'd still have Axl's worldwide popularity, pussy galore, and the last real album I made was in 1991, i'd feel pretty fuckin' stud.


Personally if I had to choose a career it'd be U2. I get to be The Rolling Stones of my era, retain stadium sell out crowds, yet keep all my artistic street cred as a song poet.

I'd just do it with GN'R/Pearl Jam styled attitude and songs.

Well, i don't entirely agree with most of this:

1. Reason Axl is able to do that, cause when he does decide to tour, its a possible once in a lifetime event. Bon jovi don't have to do festivals to sell 60k tickets. I'm sure they could headline a rock in rio if they wanted to.

2. Bon jovi don't sell out A show in NY. they sell out 3 straight nights in 60k seat Giants Stadium. or like 10-12 in London O2 Arena.. Back to back in Soldier Field in Chicago.


When they play anywhere, MOntreal,Toronto,Pittsburgh,NY,Chicago LA.. they sell out MULTIPLE nights. Not 3/4 to 1/2 and they sell FULL price and even the seats behind the stage where u can't even see.

killingvector
 Rep: 21 

Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame

misterID wrote:
-D- wrote:

Well, bon jovi have never been critically acclaimed etc. Their music isn't as deep or what have u as GNR's but If i had to choose which career I'd rather have... I think I'd take Jon's

What people don't realize and what pisses me off is, Jon obviously is doing something right to still be this huge so many years later.

The fact they survived and thrived during grunge alone, should warrant induction. no one else with that style did. Even the mighty Def Leppard got buried.

I'm pretty sure Jon sold his soul to the devil. That has to be it. He still looks like he's 35. Sounds like he's still 35. Still makes tons of money, and has hit records.... Just like he did when he was 35. It's insane.

I doubt The Black Crowes will get inducted, but Janes Addiction definitely will.

Desmond Child should be inducted before Jon Bon Jovi. Hell, even Aerosmith.

Bono
 Rep: 386 

Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame

Bono wrote:
Axlin08 wrote:

Yeah and Axl can blame all of that on the media. No shows were all a media creation.


Late starts and delays... that's all Axl's fault. And his responses to it, even today are incredibly IMMATURE for a guy his age.

He goes back and forth, but basically "i'll get there when I get there, so deal with it".

Axl can blame himself for it. Montreal, St. Louis, Vancouver, Philly....    he's earned the reputation and the media ran with it over the years.  it's a tad exagerated yes but it's fully warrented by Axl's actions.

-D-
 Rep: 231 

Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame

-D- wrote:

The Desmond Child thing gets old. It isn't like he wrote the song by himself. It was a collaboration and funny thing to me is, he never had anywhere near the hits with other artists as he did with Bon Jovi, so that should tell u something.

Bon Jovi,also, wrote plenty of hits without Desmond Child. Dead Or Alive, Lay Your Hands On Me, Living In Sin, Ill Be There For You, Bed of Roses, Always, Who Says You can't Go Home.

Naltav
 Rep: 70 

Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame

Naltav wrote:
-D- wrote:

The Desmond Child thing gets old. It isn't like he wrote the song by himself. It was a collaboration and funny thing to me is, he never had anywhere near the hits with other artists as he did with Bon Jovi, so that should tell u something.

Bon Jovi,also, wrote plenty of hits without Desmond Child. Dead Or Alive, Lay Your Hands On Me, Living In Sin, Ill Be There For You, Bed of Roses, Always, Who Says You can't Go Home.

D, was it you who recommended the documentary about Bon Jovi ("When We Were....something) a while back?

I saw that. A good documentary, wether you're a fan or not. It was interesting to see how Jon Bon Jovi ran his "business". I was suprised at how much it was basicly a one-man-show in the sense of behind the scenes decision-making etc etc.

I've always guessed that he's the boss in that band (considering the name and all), but I never knew it operated at the level it does. The other band members were basicly session-players and didn't seem to mind (at least as far as I could tell).

Prolly similar to the way GNR is run (after mid 90's). Except in Bon Jovi's case, the session-players have stuck with him since the start(?).

It seems to be the norm in many of the huge bands. In most cases it works and in a few cases not so good.  When it gets to a certain level, you can't have 5-6 people running the ship, I guess...
smile

RussTCB
 Rep: 633 

Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame

RussTCB wrote:

removed

misterID
 Rep: 476 

Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame

misterID wrote:
Axlin08 wrote:

I kinda disagree Mr. ID. I think Axl chased trends to create his sound, but not necessarily to sell records.

But I do agree with the others that somewhere in the late 90's Axl lost sight of what made Guns N' Roses popular and made their sound.

There's nothing wrong with experimentation and maturing your sound (think Pearl Jam), but literally transferring from one record being a stadium hard rock band with blues-influences, to an industrial rock band in one record, was too stark a jump.

Axl's ballads show full creative effort, but it's obvious with the rockers on CD he had NO FUCKING CLUE what to do with GN'R rockers with Slash, Izzy & Duff not there to spearhead that.

There must've been some miracle from God that Axl was able to bring CD & Better together. The rest sound disjointed. Sorry is the only one that actually sounds like a "natural progression" rocker from UYI. It almost has some grunge-isms about it. I could hear Layne on it.

Well, good Lord, Axlin, you could call Bono, Bowie, Robert Smith, etc., all trend chasers then. Almost every album they did had a different sound to them. And Axl said he didn't think of music or songs in terms of "hard" or "soft", and to me anyway, his was a natural progression, because I don't hear one forced song on CD, where it seems he was making a hard rock song for the sake of needing a rocker. CD is one of my favorite GN'R rock songs, btw. CD really flows for me. TWAT, TIL, ITW, The Blues, IRS, Prostitute, CITR, totally natural to me.

None of the guys I mentioned ever used different music elements to try and sound modern, or keep up with trends like some bands; they did it because that was the music that influenced and inspired them to make music, like Punk, R&B, Classic Rock did for them initially. Chasing trends calls them a poser. And none of those guys are posers. One of things I'm impressed most about Axl is how he dived into synths and beats, mastered it and made it his own. I'm sure Axl knew he was going to take a hit by doing it. 

Totally offensive to say it was a jump the shark moment, imo.

Bono
 Rep: 386 

Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame

Bono wrote:
misterID wrote:

Well, good Lord, Axlin, you could call Bono, Bowie, Robert Smith, etc., all trend chasers then. Almost every album they did had a different sound to them. And Axl said he didn't think of music or songs in terms of "hard" or "soft", and to me anyway, his was a natural progression, because I don't hear one forced song on CD, where it seems he was making a hard rock song for the sake of needing a rocker. CD is one of my favorite GN'R rock songs, btw. CD really flows for me. TWAT, TIL, ITW, The Blues, IRS, Prostitute, CITR, totally natural to me.

None of the guys I mentioned ever used different music elements to try and sound modern, or keep up with trends like some bands; they did it because that was the music that influenced and touched them, like Punk, R&B, Classic Rock did for them initially. Chasing trends calls them a poser. And none of those guys are posers. One of things I'm impressed most about Axl is how he dived into synths and beats, mastered it and made it his own. I'm sure Axl knew he was going to take a hit by doing it. 

Totally offensive to say it was a jump the shark moment, imo.

That highlighted part is exactly the opposite of how I feel and likely a  huge reason why I don't like the album all that much. I find the album to be incredibly forced. It's trying way to hard on way too many levels. Over production, too many guitar layers, over produced vocals, too many vocal layers, too many industrial aspects that don't fit or seemingly come out of nowhere.  .

My problem with CD has always been it has glimpses of brilliance lost in a  haze of medicore music with way too much going on. So much of CD in my opinion is pointless.  It's completely forced, trying to be too many things at once.  The album is being forced into being epic and it falls incredibly flat in that apsect. 

All in my jaded, hatefull opinion though of course.  tongue

Gibbo
 Rep: 191 

Re: Guns N Roses OFFICIALLY inducted into Rock n Roll Hall of Fame

Gibbo wrote:
Bono wrote:
misterID wrote:

Well, good Lord, Axlin, you could call Bono, Bowie, Robert Smith, etc., all trend chasers then. Almost every album they did had a different sound to them. And Axl said he didn't think of music or songs in terms of "hard" or "soft", and to me anyway, his was a natural progression, because I don't hear one forced song on CD, where it seems he was making a hard rock song for the sake of needing a rocker. CD is one of my favorite GN'R rock songs, btw. CD really flows for me. TWAT, TIL, ITW, The Blues, IRS, Prostitute, CITR, totally natural to me.

None of the guys I mentioned ever used different music elements to try and sound modern, or keep up with trends like some bands; they did it because that was the music that influenced and touched them, like Punk, R&B, Classic Rock did for them initially. Chasing trends calls them a poser. And none of those guys are posers. One of things I'm impressed most about Axl is how he dived into synths and beats, mastered it and made it his own. I'm sure Axl knew he was going to take a hit by doing it. 

Totally offensive to say it was a jump the shark moment, imo.

That highlighted part is exactly the opposite of how I feel and likely a  huge reason why I don't like the album all that much. I find the album to be incredibly forced. It's trying way to hard on way too many levels. Over production, too many guitar layers, over produced vocals, too many vocal layers, too many industrial aspects that don't fit or seemingly come out of nowhere.  .

My problem with CD has always been it has glimpses of brilliance lost in a  haze of medicore music with way too much going on. So much of CD in my opinion is pointless.  It's completely forced, trying to be too many things at once.  The album is being forced into being epic and it falls incredibly flat in that apsect. 

All in my jaded, hatefull opinion though of course.  tongue

Spot on too much shit going on 22

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB