Is GnR "DANGEROUS"?

[HamsterDemocracy]

Guns N' Roses are dangerous in the way any band would be featuring a frontman in his mid-'40s who drives a five-hundred-thousand-dollar car and lives in an isolated mansion in Malibu.

Which is to say, the whole "Dangerous" edge is getting stale, since GN'R stopped being dangerous when Axl stopped trying to be in the early '90s.

And I think that's a good thing, not a bad thing. Who wants to see a guy old enough to be your father trying to be bad?

I can't wait for CD to drop just so Axl can stop trying to keep the old fans happy by doing the whole "bad boy" image he's got going right now... the songs are good for nostalgia's sake, but I am ready to hear Axl sing about heartbreak and maturity rather than dancing with heroin and scoring hot chicks in sleazy apartments. 

[Bono]

Guns N' Roses are dangerous in the way any band would be featuring a frontman in his mid-'40s who drives a five-hundred-thousand-dollar car and lives in an isolated mansion in Malibu.

Which is to say, the whole "Dangerous" edge is getting stale, since GN'R stopped being dangerous when Axl stopped trying to be in the early '90s.

And I think that's a good thing, not a bad thing. Who wants to see a guy old enough to be your father trying to be bad?

I can't wait for CD to drop just so Axl can stop trying to keep the old fans happy by doing the whole "bad boy" image he's got going right now... the songs are good for nostalgia's sake, but I am ready to hear Axl sing about heartbreak and maturity rather than dancing with heroin and scoring hot chicks in sleazy apartments.?

I agree 100%. 

[25]

I am ready to hear Axl sing about heartbreak and maturity rather than dancing with heroin and scoring hot chicks in sleazy apartments. 

No matter how heartbroken and mature you are, there's always room for songs about scoring hot chicks in sleazy apartments.   

[jazjme]

I am ready to hear Axl sing about heartbreak and maturity rather than dancing with heroin and scoring hot chicks in sleazy apartments. 

No matter how heartbroken and mature you are, there's always room for songs about scoring hot chicks in sleazy apartments.   

of course , there always is that, when you want to be simple minded, , there are plenty of band out there, who are young and sing about that, and stuff,(.hm though Id say ACDC were probably the best) and emo heartbreaks, and some just well I, dunno, I havent, really paid much attention? should I .to the rock out now? lol

What I hear from GNR is the evolution of what the band is, and the substance and depth, of the tunes , as far as what we have heard, are more rock n roll and real at least to me, than what others seem to try to emulate.

[HamsterDemocracy]

I am ready to hear Axl sing about heartbreak and maturity rather than dancing with heroin and scoring hot chicks in sleazy apartments. 

No matter how heartbroken and mature you are, there's always room for songs about scoring hot chicks in sleazy apartments.   

of course , there always is that, when you want to be simple minded, , there are plenty of band out there, who are young and sing about that, and stuff,(.hm though Id say ACDC were probably the best) and emo heartbreaks, and some just well I, dunno, I havent, really paid much attention? should I .to the rock out now? lol

What I hear from GNR is the evolution of what the band is, and the substance and depth, of the tunes , as far as what we have heard, are more rock n roll and real at least to me, than what others seem to try to emulate.

The amazing thing for me is that GN'R - "new" GN'R, that is - really is unique. It may be a glorified cover band right now with Axl headlining, and I can accept that criticism; but when people accuse them of just soaking up the old band's success, that I disagree with. It may seem like that right now, but it will all change. If you can try to ignore the name of the band, the sound is revolutionary. This is fabulous.

Listen to The Blues from Tacoma '02. Pitman's background synth underlining Bucket's sweeping guitar scales and Fortus' choppy power chords with Finck's unique, creative bends. Sadly, a lot of this has been lost in '06.

The band's image and Axl's voice may have sucked in '02 but I think they were touching upon something very fresh and original and some of that is being lost now...Axl took the criticism of '02 to heart and unfortunately took out some of the stuff that made the band stand out - The Blues now isn't the same, it's just lacking that extra "umph" IMO, and a large part of it is the little stuff: the synth, the Bucket scales, etc.

But I'm hoping the album stays the same style as it was in 2002, because I think Axl is just reverting to this "bad boy" image and older musical style to satisfy the old Guns fans until the album drops. Then people will be familiar with the new sound and he can have room to experiment.

And of course a lot of people are going to hate it - people already loathe Rhiad and Silkworms - but people have a habit of ignoring great music, and then years later people come back to it and say, "Hey, you know, that stuff was really, really ahead of its time." Look at the Velvet Underground.

I think Axl and his band are touching on strokes of genius and I also think Buckethead is a large part of that. When you listen to the demos it's very clear that Axl and Bucket needed each other through that period - Axl is the type of guy who needs to write to music and he needs a great guitarist to help him with that; Buckethead is the type of artist who needs a singer to help balance him. I mean, the man has done some cool solo work, but none of it - not even Electric Tears or For Mom - compares to the solo in TWAT. Nothing.

Bucket's absence has made me feel a bit sad, but I'm hoping the album still includes his work and regardless I think his touch will still be there. I'm very much looking forward to Chinese Democracy more so than ever before - regardless of whether it's "Guns N' Roses" or not, it has the potential to be one of the greatest albums of all time or one of the largest mistakes in history. I'm leaning towards the former, but there's always such a fine line between brilliance and bullshit.

I already know the sound from 2002 was awesome - I'm hoping the extra four years gave Axl time to sharpen up songs like Better, TWAT, Rhiad, etc. (Although Rhiad might not be on CD anyway.) It's the little stuff that is going to elevate these songs.

[25]

The band's image and Axl's voice may have sucked in '02 but I think they were touching upon something very fresh and original and some of that is being lost now...Axl took the criticism of '02 to heart and unfortunately took out some of the stuff that made the band stand out - The Blues now isn't the same, it's just lacking that extra "umph" IMO, and a large part of it is the little stuff: the synth, the Bucket scales, etc.

But I'm hoping the album stays the same style as it was in 2002, because I think Axl is just reverting to this "bad boy" image and older musical style to satisfy the old Guns fans until the album drops. Then people will be familiar with the new sound and he can have room to experiment.

I have a feeling that the band is probably reverting to the idea outlined in the RS interview years ago, of bringing the band's sound up to date (or forging towards Axl's idea of how they should sound) in small increments. After 2002, and the ill-feeling caused by the aborted tour, they've pretty much reverted to banging out the tunes in typical rock style (though they've found a pretty tight groove of their own on the old tracks, imo) but I can see that changing when the band is unleashed on their own material.   

[shoup]

Ted Nugent dangerous? Yes.
Mike Tyson dangerous? Yes.
O.J. Simpson dangerous? Yes.


Axl Rose dangerous? Nope.

[jazjme]

The band's image and Axl's voice may have sucked in '02 but I think they were touching upon something very fresh and original and some of that is being lost now...Axl took the criticism of '02 to heart and unfortunately took out some of the stuff that made the band stand out - The Blues now isn't the same, it's just lacking that extra "umph" IMO, and a large part of it is the little stuff: the synth, the Bucket scales, etc.

But I'm hoping the album stays the same style as it was in 2002, because I think Axl is just reverting to this "bad boy" image and older musical style to satisfy the old Guns fans until the album drops. Then people will be familiar with the new sound and he can have room to experiment.

I have a feeling that the band is probably reverting to the idea outlined in the RS interview years ago, of bringing the band's sound up to date (or forging towards Axl's idea of how they should sound) in small increments. After 2002, and the ill-feeling caused by the aborted tour, they've pretty much reverted to banging out the tunes in typical rock style (though they've found a pretty tight groove of their own on the old tracks, imo) but I can see that changing when the band is unleashed on their own material.   

I totally are , I especialy agree, with the band just churning out the music in old rock star , which imo is wise, cause I remember reading not so lng ago , and or hearing axlsaying, "oh people are not gonna think this is axl singing," and .blah blah blah. So what better way to say FU, and prove them wrong, its obvious that axl can still sing, and very obvious that axl rocks hardcore, and most of the reviews, say so, I agree.

BUT yes , that omp isnt there, yet. Didnt axl also say that some older fan will probably fall away, as he tried to bring this band into itsown. ?

Well thus far I think he has now, and giving all the old time fans, a show they cant deny. Yet also by utlilzing and featuring the new guys via solos. And seems more and more people are warming up. How the hell else are people gonna know the players, this isnt a fashion show, not a boy band, not a smile look pretty for the camera, this is fuckng GNR,: the fans like myself, look more into the artistic side, and musician ship, not the damn clothes they wear.


though I do llike cool lookin clothes.But that is in the eye of the beholder, Im more aural in this, to me its about the sound, and the music, and lyrics . 

[Mikkamakka]

Funny how the Axlites attacked Velvet Revolver when they used the world 'dangerous'. When these guys (or more likely Axl and the management) say they are the most dangerous band on the world it's acceptable. Wake up. Both band used this to sell more albums. How could soemone be dangerous who' singing about past loves all the time and buys a Flying Neon Pegasus ?? ? Unpredictable? Guess it's not about the setlist but the time they manage to hit the stage.

[jazjme]

Funny how the Axlites attacked Velvet Revolver when they used the world 'dangerous'. When these guys (or even likely Axl and the management) say they are the most dangerous band on the world it's acceptable. Wake up. Both band used this to sell more albums. How could soemone be dangerous who' singing about past loves all the time and buys a Flying Neon Pegasus ?    Unpredictable? Guess it's not about the setlist but the time they manage to hit the stage.

to that I think you really dont listen to lyrics, or are far more suferficial!

[Mikkamakka]

What's so dangerous about Nu-GN'R's lyrics? Please gimme examples.

[jazjme]

I didnt say they were dangerous, did I?

I was commenting on you saying singing about past loves, , so to that I ask what past loves do you mean,?

Do you think Better is about a girl? (and music is subjective).

Do you think IRS is about a girl? (and agin music is subjective).

what past love do you talk about?

and words can be dangerous!

lol
BUT its more about the spirit and yes the FUCK you attitude!

[Mikkamakka]

I guess Better can be about a girl (partly at least). As for IRS and Madagascar it's unlikely.


BTW I don't feel the Fuck You-attitude. The 2006 line-up is really tight, they play with emotions unlike in 2002 when there was no spirit, but it's more of a 'we're enjoying what we're doing and having a great time' than anything rebellious.

[zombux]

who the fuck cares if GNR are dangerous or not? if you want a dangerous show, visit some black metal or grindcore show, that can be dangerous sometimes, not mainstream rock band

[jazjme]

I guess Better can be about a girl (partly at least). As for IRS and Madagascar it's unlikely.


BTW I don't feel the Fuck You-attitude. The 2006 line-up is really tight, they play with emotions unlike in 2002 when there was no spirit, but it's more of a 'we're enjoying what we're doing and having a great time' than anything rebellious.

Thats my point!

The fuck you attitiude is aboutt really doin it cause they are enjoying it, it started that way, it changed, it evolved, but ultimately the spirit is there, and still the same!

[Origen]

"Was" Dangerous yes.
"Is" Dangerous no.

They arn't living by the edge and scraping to get by or are living a dangerous lifestyle, and to me as far as a rock n roll band is concerned that's dangerous. They play "dangerous" songs by an old band and that's about it, imo.

[metallex78]

Uhhh.. Pantera carried the heavy metal tourch through the 90's.. Metal woukd not have survuved wuth out them. Pantera is showed the same if not more respect in their field of music, metal.. as gnR is if not more.

Maybe true in the U.S. but I know that in Europe/UK Pantera never really took off. At least not enough that I'd notice. I don't have any idea if they were big anywhere else, and I wouldn't want to throw the question to the rest of the board and derail the thread. But, in parting, I have to say that metal would have probably made it through the 90's just fine without Pantera. I'm not saying they're a terrible band or anything, I just think that their fanbase is a lot more marginal than a GNR, or a Metallica for that matter.

Pantera were just as big in Australia as GN'R and Metallica were. And yeah, Pantera in their prime took the place of "music to piss your parents off" that GN'R and Metallica both held, but then started to change as they went softer.
Pantera definitely made an impact and helped save metal at a time when it was becoming passe with new musical genres like grunge taking over. And unfortunately with the death of Dime, a lot of people are only beginning to reaslise how great they were.

Anyway, back on topic, I don't agree with the GN'R "dangerous" label, but Axl sure is one of the last, if not THE last truly engaging frontman in rock. Like others have said, you just don't know what you'll get at a GN'R show, and that's part of the huge draw to him.

I'm so glad that Axl and GN'R in whatever form, dangerous or not dangerous, are still around

[Scabbie]

Maybe not dangerous, but still 'edgy'. The strange feeling is thats what I love about Axl - you never quite know whats gonna happen. Download was great!

[codenameninja]

When Buckethead joined the band along with his nunchucks, that possibly made Gn'R more dangerous than before. But since his departure and the fact that Axl appears to be a happier individual these days, i see Gn'R as really quite safe.

[November_Rain]

I wouldn?t say dangerous, I would say ADDICTIVE