Here Today... Gone To Hell!

O.k. so from my experince on these forums over the last 4 years this isn't gonna  be somthing of a shock. The perception that this isn't truely Guns N' Roses is a commonly shared opinion here and at other Gn'R forums. For the most part though fans who have this opinion realies it is what it is and have accepted this band as "Guns N' Roses" despite their feelings over the use of the name. A big issue facing Guns N' Roses though is not convincing people like us but convincing the general public that this is Guns N' Roses.  In the eyes of the public and most media, this is Axl Rose and some musicians. Just now I was watching The Loop Weekend on Much More Music and they were talking about the band coming to Canada. They refered to Guns N' Roses as Axl Rose and some semi-familiar musicians.  That seems to be the perception of most media outlets. Be it radio or music tv or muisc publications. In my mind that's a major problem facing this band and somthing they need to fix if they want to be taken seriously. They can't be known as Axl Rose and the new guys. I have a few ideas of how they could go about changing this perception and I'll list them but I also want to hear what you guys thik they should do.

1. Axl needs to do a major interview with a major magazine and explain the whole thing. Tell in his words why this is Guns N' Roses and he needs to do it without coming across like he's laying any blame on the old members. I'm not saying he needs to accept the blame but he definately can't lay the blame. It will only alienate some long time fans and possibly turn of the casual fan who still holds onto the idea that Gn'R without Slash is the "Axl Rose solo project"

2. You can't be spotlighting Axl in such a huge way. Yes he's the main ingrediant here but you need to get the new guys face time. Everyone with half an interest knows Axl's the singer. Any type of planned photo shoot needs to be of the band  and not just Axl. For the immediate future Axl should not be in any picture alone. The new members need to be up front. I know that's tough considering Axl's the frontman but it needs to happen. So if Axl does an inteview in Rolling Stone the only picture of him should be on the cover along with the band or at least part of the band. The pictures on the inside need to be of the band and no Axl pictuers inside the pages of the interview.

3. Pictures again. If there are any pictures on the inside sleave of the new album there needs to be an over abundance of band pictures. Robin, Richard, and Ron need to be spotlighted in a huge way. These are the guys taking over from Slash in the eyes of the public. Let the public get to know them.

4. The official site needs to be freshend up right away befroe the album comes out. The big picture of Axl needs to come down. the site already looks like the Axl Rose solo project. It should be a picture of the entire band. Or at least Axl with Robin or Tommy,  or Richard or Ron. Also there needs to be a link that's easy to see and user freindly that can take you to all the bios of the members acommpanied with a picture of  each guy. Stuff like this needs to be in place before the album coms out. In my opinion

5. In the future if Axl does any type of appearance on talk shows or award shows he can't be coming out to old Gn'R music. The new music needs to be heard while people are seeing Axl so that there's an association with Guns and the new songs being built.

6. This wasn't my idea. Someone on this site mentioned it a few days ago and I agree 100%. Richard, Robin, and Ron should do  an interview in Guitar World or somthing. They should have all three guys on the cover.  This could easily happen. Gn'R managment just needs to push it. This would be huge in my opinion.  The guys would be free to speak their mind in an interview and nothig but good could come from it.

All this seems pretty simply and minor I know but in my opinion it would go along way in changing the perception that this isn't Guns N' Roses. What'ya guys thnk?

Tons of bands still call their band the same name and only have the lead singer left but their fans dont seem to care. The cure do it, so does weezer. I think if axl relesed an album in 2002 and in 2004 was releasing the? follow up and now finally in 2006 the 3rd album he had planned, those issues you listed would not be an issue anymore.? No one said this is not gnr when izzy and steven left. People will accept this to be gnr when they release a kick ass album

Axl needs to put out the album and that will solve everything. The music will talk for itself.

I agree that these ideas would help the cause.  But honestly, the music will do the talking (as mentioned above).  More and more people will accept this new band when good music is heard.

great ideas man, i hope the take some of these to heart. the 'new' guys definitely need a lot more exposure.  i'm glad there is a little article on there at least about them but we need photos, bio and more on the new site asap i think!

the Cure is not at all the same thing. It's always been Robert Smith pretty much. It's commonly known that the Cure has always been his vision and if you didn't like it you could go do somthing else. ?Weezer never gained the fame of Gn'R. They never gained the fame of Slash even so in essence they never had a legend leave the band. What Axl is doing is what it would be like if Mick Jager, or Bono, or Steven Tyler went off and made a new band and called it the same name. THAT would be a major issue with alot of people. The controversy is simply a ?testement to the love people have for Guns N' Roses. In my opinion it is a big issue right now. the band isn't taken seriously. We take it seriously yes but there are far more people out there who are still saying "Is Slash in the band? No? then it's not Guns N' Roses" ? ???

?
C'mon people. Why is everyone in such denial. It's o.k. so admit this is an issue right now. People also thought the shows were gonna sell out like hot cakes but they haven't. There is a huge amount of people out there who don't like the idea of this being Guns N' Roses. I dont' want this thread to become a debate on the name issue but it has alot to do with it. people percieve this band as fake and there are ways to change that perecption. If anyone thinks releasing the album is all that needs to be done than you are simply kidding yourself. :-\

that is 100% INCORRECT, fyi. Rivers Cuomo, Pat Wilson, and Brian Bell have been with the band the entire time for every ablum from 1994 until present day. The only position that has changed over time was the bassist, from Matt Sharp, to Mikey Welsh, and now they have Scott Schriner

Just for future reference, not to bash you or anything, but double check your facts before you post

Bono no one on this board thought the shows were goingn to sell like hot cakes without an album or single. Everyone said they need to release single BEFORE the tour if they want good sales.

I agree, the BIGGEST issue for GNR to overcome is releasing Chinese Democracy finally. 

So your telling me that if Axl puts out an awesome album that sells millions. ?People still wont accept the new GNR? ?I think your crazy and fooling yourself! ?Yeah, some people still wont (the hardcore Slash fans), but there will be new fans that take there place. ? ?

See saying "the album will speak for itself" is based on the assumption that the songs are gonna actually fit on radio format. That the songs will be a hit, that MTV will throw the band's videos into heavy rotation. Why assume this? Why not take matters into their own hands and push the band rather than simply sitting back and expecting the perception to change? It forward progress to prmote the the fact that this is Guns N' Roses rather than let people wonder who's still in the band and who's not. Doing so is only hiding behind the legacy the old band left.

Exactly! 

Well I wouldn't get to riled up.  There just starting to promote.  Maybe they will do some things like this.

They need a single out atleast 2 weeks before the first show to get the shows sold out.

Naturally the biggest issue is going to be the name.

I think alot of people on this board down play just how iconic the Axl/Slash pairing really is/was in the general public. By not releasing anything for 15 years now, that image has just been allowed to burn in even deeper as the older material has seen a resurgence. Alx/Slash have been put on that pedestal with Page/Plant, Tyler/Perry, Keith/Mick, Bono/Edge, Gilmour/Waters, Jon/Richie, I mean some of the absolute biggest names in rock n' roll the past 40 years. A new album isn't going to make people just forget and move on. Short of one of them dying, there will always be a clamoring for a reunion by the general music public. Steven Tyler's failed attempt at Aerosmith without Joe Perry is a testament to this.

The key to getting this project over with the general public is going to be finding a way to deal with the issue of the break up without alienating the fans. As long as he is diplomatic and chalks it up to a difference of opinion without assigning blame I think he has a shot at it, but he is going to have to be much more conciliatory than he has been in the past about the subject. Also, he is going to have to mentally prepare himself that people are going to ask him about it ad nauseum, and that he is going to have to just answer the question and move on without having a fit. Trying to win a popular opinion battle takes alot of ass kissing, and while that is something he has never been good at he had better pucker up among the media because no amount of good music is going to do it for him.

The best way to look at the issue is as being a war for the hearts and minds of the GNR fanbase. No amount of brute force or good music is going to win the war, it is going to take a coordinated PR campaign to paint Axl and the new guys in the best light possible to convince people to give them a chance.

When the album is released it will solve a lot of this problem. The reason is that then the band will actually play a majority of their own songs during the live show and not just be playing songs written by the old guys.

Only when the band stops playing songs that make people remember what it was like to have Slash in the band, will people stop thinking about what it was like when Slash was in the band. I mean, whenever I hear the new guys play November Rain or Sweet Child, I just think of what it would be like to hear Slash playing it again, but when the band plays Better that is not something that goes through my mind.

We've made our points.....lock!

mmm... i really do think at this stage, the only way to successfully promote this band is by promoting Axl.

If CD is a major hit, then we can start to get the other guys out there, but even then, its going to be a hard/impossible sell getting people to forget the old guys (esp. Slash of course)

GNR were bigger than Weezer and the Cure combined and they werent a 'faceless' type band like many of todays band. They were all stars especially Slash and Axl who were mega stars. Slash had his own Rolling Stone cover - when has that ever happened to a guitar player in a band??

Axl is the keyin the forseeable future -  the only way to tangilbly (and its a big stretch) market this as Guns N' Roses in any way, shape or form is to have the main focus on Axl. We on the forums are in the know, but remember, the majority of casual or older fans think they either broke up or Slash is still there

I agree with everythig you said. Axl can't be dodging the question if and when it comes up in interviews. Assuming he's gonna do a ?few. He just has to answer it and not come off as if he's annoyed by it. People want to know and it's only natural and to be expected. ?You're also right about the Axl/Slash pairing. They are no doubt up there with the other duos you mentioned. That's a tough thing to over come and it's not gonna be solved by simply putting out the album. An album is no doubt gonna help. ?It can't not help but with the way the music industry is today no matter how good Chinese Democracy is it's not gonna have the mainstay on the charts ?the way albums could have 15 or even 10 years ago. The singles will run thier course for ?a year the album will chart and hopefull stay for 6-8 months in the top 40(that might be a stretch) but after that than what? ?the problem is this Gn'R has no definitive number one guy on lead guitar so it's gonna be hard for fans , mostly casual fans to get passed that. Alot of the people that go to these shows will watch the new guys for a bit and then likley focus on Axl for the rest of the show once they realies or it simply sinks in that Slash isn't gonna come out :hihi:

yeah right. Only a fan in denial that this is an issue would say lock the thread now. :P :hihi: :peace:

See and to me going about it that way is misleadinga nd in a way it shows a lack of confidence. i understadn that Axl needs to be the focus but there really needs to start being a bigger push and a bigger emphaisi on the fact that this is a ew band. Otherwise liek I said their simply riding the old bands legacy.  It's a tricky thing to go about doing I realies that but it needs to start somewhere.  It'd be really great if some of the things I mentioned in the original post could take place before the tour starts. That way the casual fan would know who they are watching on stage. As it stand now most people won't know.  To be honest the people I'm going with are excited to see them(Axl) yet they have no idea who's in the band(To anyone who couldn't go I'm sorry I'm bringing people who aren't diehards :-\). So they aren't gonna know or likely care who they're watching on stage. To them it's just gonna be Axl and the "replacements". Well one Replacement I guess :hihi:

You're totally right.

Most people view this as Axl Rose and new bandmembers, NOT "Guns N' Roses."

Because the people familiar with this artist are the ones who grew up watching the original band.

People say "loads of bands have lineup changes." Yeah, but GN'R was very different. GN'R is like the Stones. Mick Jagger and Keith Richards are The Rolling Stones for most people. When one of them dies the band dies.

GN'R came about in a time when the IMAGE was what helped propel them, and Slash is as synonymous with GN'R as Axl is. You can't say that about many guitarists. Who's the guitarist in The Cure? Fuck if I know. I don't even know the singer's name.

MAJOR bands like GN'R that have such a profound influence over such a short span of time and come to symbolize so much for a specific generation of listeners are different than bands that are kind of popular over a few decades and generally change bandmembers every once in a while. GN'R wasn't like that and that is why so many people have a hard time letting Slash go.

I don't think people would care if Slash were still in the band. Duff? Izzy? Adler? Most people - CASUAL listeners - don't really know them much. It's Slash and Axl who were "Guns N' Roses" for most people, and when you lose an essential member who is part of the image of the band it's hard to replace that and not offend the fans who grew up with that.

I think if Axl wants the band to be taken seriously he needs to go on a nationwide interview program and give HIS point of view of what happened with GN'R and explain his feelings. It'll clear up a lot of misconceptions about what went on and also will give him a chance to tell his stories about how Slash didn't want to do UYI and didn't want to do any progressive songs, etc., blah blah blah.

So, Bono, I agree with you 100%.

And please note I'm not saying I agree with people who think this way -- I'm saying if Axl wants to CONVINCE THESE PEOPLE - people who AREN'T like us and who understand a bit more of the band's history and what's gone on - he needs to make a public appearance and talk about it.


Bring on Barbra Walters.  :hihi:

See, if anything, giving interviews about it being the others guys faults that things blew up is only going to reinforce the view that it was Axl who blew the thing up, or that he became so intolerable to deal with that everyone had to leave. He needs to be a diplomat to the Nth degree and just take the highroad. Not alienating the fan base and finding a way to get out from under that idea that it was somehow his fault is his most important task in the PR offensive he has to launch.

I'm not saying he should point fingers, but he should say what he said to Kurt Loder but take it more public. He's stayed quiet for too long. It doesn't necessarily have to be an "attack" on Slash and the rest - he just needs to clarify what happened. Explain what's going on with this album, what took so long, what his plans are, and how everything turned out this way.

So ture RR. What makes the depature of Slash so hard for people is that not only was his style of play essential ?it was also his image. maybe more so than any other guitar player in history Slash's image was so essential to the band. I dressed up as Axl a few years ago for halloween and it was a wicked cosutme I swear. My buddy dressed up as Slash and to be honest whe we walked into the bars on our pub crawl it would take people a second to figure out who I was. They had no problem knowing who my buddy was. The kicker was my costume was down to the very earing. I had it all. Kilt, belt, bandanna, flanel shirt the MARTYR t-shirt, the blue mic with yellow end, My costume was great and was in fact better than my buddies Slash costume but all he needed was a jean jacket a black wig and a Top hat and he was instantly recognized by every single person. ?That image of Guns N' roses is engrained in peopel's mind and when they hear Gusn N' Roses I'm sure Slash pops into thier heads every bit as much as Axl. ?So there's an example as to how importnat it is in my opinion that a new image starts being drileld inot peopel's head.


tha's the tricky part. Doing that without making it seem like it was Slash's or the old guys fault. It's gotta eb doen in a tactful way becasue there are two sides to this story and one of those sides has more guys who share the same opinion. If Axl puts it out in a ?slanderous or derrogetory way there's no doubt the ex-members would counter the point in the next interview they do. it'd be unavoidable because journalists would ask them about it.

Exactly. he just needs to give his side of things. Explain how he feels it fell apart. I mean if he wanted to do ballads and the other guys wanted to do rock than say so. If it was industrial vs rock say so. Honesty goes along way with people. Also I think it'd be really good of him to explain how the new guys came to be in the band. Another perception is that they are simply hired guns. To be honest I dont think any of us on here have anything that can really dispute that idea either. You'd like to think they are a true band but has there ever been anything documenting the circumstances  of how this lineup came to be? I don't believe so. I'd definately be interested in hearing how things came to be. Did Robin rehearse or was he simply giving a  position. Was Ron always on the short list of replacements in case a Bukethead type situation occured. Rockin ot since grade 9 how is it that Tommy got involved? You know things like this are interesting not only to us but to music fans as well. They are a legendary band and muisc fans period will read this stuff.

Yeah, considering how popular they are, there really isn't much available in terms of "History" of GN'R. I was at B&N today and they have a whole section - incidentally enough - for U2 DVDs (total coincidence, I swear!  :hihi:). Rattle and Hum was even released under Paramount's Widescreen Collection, same DVD cover as they give for their films.

Apart from WTTheVideos and Tokyo there isn't much out there.

I'm hoping a behind-the-scenes of Chinese Democracy comes out eventually. The history behind it must be awesome. Interviews with people like Brian May, Moby, Buckethead (with his puppet of course) and AXL would be cool, along with Finck, Fortus, Tommy, and all the others.

I won't buy it unless Shaquille O'Neal is on the dvd. :rofl:  A beind the scenes making of  dvd would be amazing. Maybe someday they could do a VH1 Classic Albums thing and release it on dvd. Though it being a  "classic Album" series we may have to wait 10 years for it. :hihi:

Was the Rattle and Hum dvd ..... uh no wait.... must stay on topic.... must avoid U2 conversation        in Gn'R section.... :hihi:

I'd love to hear Shaq's contributions to CD.  :hihi:

These issues will all be overcome if the album kicks ass and from every indication it will be a great album.  There are some people who've made up their minds that they'll hate it no matter what so they're already a lost cause.  All GnR needs to win people over is to get a hit single on the radio which won't be a problem, and to release a quality album which there's no doubt they will do

I've tried to do some street work for the upcoming shows, and get people I know who love GNR interested and get tix for the upcoming shows, and every single one of these many many people, long time friends, have all said no.

The response given by every single person...

"It isn't Guns N' Roses. Not without Slash."

I disagree, I feel GNR was always Axl & Izzy's baby, and with Izzy having no interest, it leaves it to Axl, and to me, if Axl Rose is there, it's GNR. Plus, I freakin' love the new guys. I feel almost all of them, are musically superior in ability to the old stoned out guys. Once again, jmho.

But i'm telling you, these concerts are gonna struggle to sell, just like in 2002. This is really a BIG issue for alot of people, as much as I hate to say it. The simple fact is, right now the best thing Axl can do for GNR's image, is release the album and let the music talk. But even that can only do so much. This isn't 1992. GNR isn't gonna rule the world again. Even if it was a full-scale reunion. People just aren't that interested in music anymore.

If you think they're going to stop playing those old songs once the record's released, you're kidding yourself.  Most of the people who will be going to see them (before or after the release) will be there specifically to hear them play the old songs.  At best, they'll split the old/new material 50/50, but there's no way in hell you're ever going to get Guns N' Roses show without at least Welcome To The Jungle, Sweet Child O' Mine, November Rain and Paradise City.

Don't Worry, Son. Axl and the lads will be bigger than, EVER!

My Tribute band

Accrington Guns! 06, is upon the hills!

And AC/DC, Van Halen, The Rolling Stones...

The Rolling Stones were always Mick and Keith. Always. Axl and Slash and Keith and Mick are arguably the two most popular "singer-guitar" pairings of all-time.

AC/DC changed lineup very early before most of the world was familiar with the initial lineup - Back in Black was their biggest hit and this was AFTER the first lead singer had died. Also, that band was largely synonymous with the guitarists and not really the singer. I'm not saying the singers weren't important - but it wasn't the same as other bands.

And Van Halen? They picked up tons of shit after Roth left and some purists still claim he was much better. Hardly a good example.

it's not so simple , different bands, different stories.
Jagger/Richards are The Rolling Stones because they wrote most of their songs .
Malcom & Angus Young are AC/DC mainly because Bon Scott died so early.
i don't know why , when it comes to GnR, people tend to forget who wrote the songs. and let's not forget the lyrics.
i really don't know what will hapen with GnR but i hope that if the music is great, everybody will recognize it

VH is more of an example of who you like. The people who liked the more over-indugent VH, like the Roth-era. Those who like more of the softer power ballad VH, like the Hagar-era.

But neither of these guys determined what went on with VH. That was all Eddie. All blame or praise lies at his doorstep.

A big part of the problem is the image of Axl and Slash.  They looked the part together. that's why I think it's importnat for gunsnrose.com to shwocase pictures of Axl with the band members on stage rather than one big Axl picture on the  front.  Also I'm wondering if any of these guys have really done an interview regarding Guns and their involvment? It seems odd to me that Robin has been in the band for what? 7 years or so and I have never seen or hard of him giving an interview in regards to the Gn'R subject. Are the new guys really under contract that doesn't allow them to speak on the subject or what? I don't knwo but what I do know is there definately needs to be a bigger push in terms of getting this band an identity. There is no identity other than Axl. How is that good? I want the new guys showcased and I'm sure everyone else does too so why isn't it happening?  ???

Robin did a couple of interviews on the subject... but that was after he left the band to return to NIN.

This is the longest thing he's ever said about being a part of the band...

About 18 months into that, I got a call from Axl Rose, who I never met at the time. He invited me to the studio as he was writing and recording songs. It was an invitation for a casual listen. Eventually, after about 8 weeks, we started playing together. We played some of my songs and finally I left the circus and was doing records with Axl, Josh and Tommy, and what would have been a new Guns N? Roses, if you will. We wrote and rehearsed and argued and laboriously recorded several records worth of musical material, which to the best of my knowledge Axl is still finishing. But my work was through. We had dozens of finished songs, as far as I was concerned, and we were waiting for Axl to complete the songs. So the timing was perfect. Nails were about to go on the road again, and I wanted to go out on the road with them.

But the shows HAVE been selling well and there've beena  lot of sell-outs.

I've heard of on sell-out.  The tickets went on general sale on saturday... in 2002, Madison Square Garden sold out in 15 minutes.  Now it's been two days and it hasn't sold out... hardly doing well, is it.

May 12th, 2006 - New York City, NY @ Hammerstein Ballroom Sold Out!
May 14th, 2006 - New York City, NY @ Hammerstein Ballroom Sold Out!
May 15th, 2006 - New York City, NY @ Hammerstein Ballroom Sold Out!
May 17th, 2006 - New York City, NY @ Hammerstein Ballroom Sold Out!
June 7th, 2006 - London, UK @ Hammersmith Apollo Sold Out!
June 26th, 2006 - Stockholm, Sweden @ Globen Sold Out!
June 28th, 2006 - Oslo, Norway @ Spektrum Sold Out!
June 29th, 2006 - Roskilde, Denmark @ (Roskilde Festival Sold Out!)
July 5th, 2006 - Helsinki, Finland @ Hartwall Areena Sold Out!
July 6th, 2006 - Helsinki, Finland @ Hartwall Areena Sold Out!
July 21st, 2006 - Glasgow, UK @ SECC Sold Out!
July 25th, 2006 - Birmingham, UK @ NEC Arena Sold Out!
July 29th, 2006 - London, UK @ Wembley Arena Sold Out!
July 30th, 2006 - London, UK @ Wembley Arena Sold Out!
September 16th, 2006 - Las Vegas, NV @ The Joint Sold Out!
September 20th, 2006 - San Francisco, CA @ The Warfield Sold Out!
September 21st, 2006 - San Francisco, CA @ The Warfield Sold Out!

The show in Halifax Nova Scotia has sold out. I'm sure some others have but I don't feel like looking into it. Plus remember this is Guns N' Roses so arenas are probably opening up all the seats they can while other bands "selling out" the place could mean they actually only sold the seats avalible which could be half of them. Plus most rock and metal bands today can't even get 5 000 tickets sold. When they have a new album or single. Guns N' Roses is doing pretty damn well I think.

My bad... I thought you was talking only of the upcoming US tour.
But the always sell out in the UK, and selling out places like Hard Rock and Hammerstein isn't all that difficult.  Most up-and-coming bands can do it.

Yeah but Redfield, the U.S. tour is the important thing, you were right on track. Not what went on in Europe. Everything sells out in Europe. Same thing with Asian or South America. Those people are still music freaks.

But in the U.S., which is your core target, when you're GNR and you're struggling to sell out 6,000-10,000 seat arenas, I mean that's a question. But when MSG in NYC doesn't sell out immediately, considering how it did in 2002, one has to ask the question.