Is the old GNR lineup on the new RS cover?

[Naupis]

You're the one creating confusion.

You spent a whole thread talking about how Slash/Duff/Izzy and Steven are creating confusion among GNR fans and the public because the media is billing it as a GNR reunion minus Axl, and now you are arguing that Axl appearing on the cover of a major rock publication with 4 guys not in GNR calling them GNR doesn't do the same? Celebrating Appetite is one thing, but plastering old photos on the cover and calling it GNR when that is not the case can't be seen favorably among GNR fans.

[CSS]

I don't really care...

But why are people working themselves up so much? It's a magazine cover!

It won't have any impact whatsoever.

It's about Appetite For Desturction, an album that was released 20 years ago.

[Ali]

You're the one creating confusion.

You spent a whole thread talking about how Slash/Duff/Izzy and Steven are creating confusion among GNR fans and the public because the media is billing it as a GNR reunion minus Axl, and now you are arguing that Axl appearing on the cover of a major rock publication with 4 guys not in GNR calling them GNR doesn't do the same? Celebrating Appetite is one thing, but plastering old photos on the cover and calling it GNR when that is not the case can't be seen favorably among GNR fans.

I don't think they are being labeled as GN'R of today.  I think it is a retrospective on GN'R's Appetite For Destruction album.

Ali

[jarmo]

You're the one creating confusion.

You spent a whole thread talking about how Slash/Duff/Izzy and Steven are creating confusion among GNR fans and the public because the media is billing it as a GNR reunion minus Axl, and now you are arguing that Axl appearing on the cover of a major rock publication with 4 guys not in GNR calling them GNR doesn't do the same? Celebrating Appetite is one thing, but plastering old photos on the cover and calling it GNR when that is not the case can't be seen favorably among GNR fans.

Please pay attention!

There cannot be a Guns N' Roses reunion minus Axl because Guns N' Roses is Axl, Tommy, Dizzy, Robin, Richard, Ron, Chris and Frank.

Are you saying Tommy, Dizzy, Robin, Richard, Ron, Chris and Frank are playing a show?

The cover and article is about an era in the band's history. It's not about promoting some club show by using other people's names to sell more tickets.



/jarmo

[vicente]

It's so clear, I can't understand all the confusion...

[Tommie]

Does anyone know if rolling stone usually goes through all the theatrics it did with this cover?  I mean they have revealed pieces of it for the past few days... is this normal for rolling stone?  Do they do it every month?

[LunsJail]

Does anyone know if rolling stone usually goes through all the theatrics it did with this cover?? I mean they have revealed pieces of it for the past few days... is this normal for rolling stone?? Do they do it every month?

First time I've seen them do it and I follow it pretty close.

[von]

You're the one creating confusion.

You spent a whole thread talking about how Slash/Duff/Izzy and Steven are creating confusion among GNR fans and the public because the media is billing it as a GNR reunion minus Axl, and now you are arguing that Axl appearing on the cover of a major rock publication with 4 guys not in GNR calling them GNR doesn't do the same? Celebrating Appetite is one thing, but plastering old photos on the cover and calling it GNR when that is not the case can't be seen favorably among GNR fans.

Please pay attention!

There cannot be a Guns N' Roses reunion minus Axl because Guns N' Roses is Axl, Tommy, Dizzy, Robin, Richard, Ron, Chris and Frank.

Are you saying Tommy, Dizzy, Robin, Richard, Ron, Chris and Frank are playing a show?

The cover and article is about an era in the band's history. It's not about promoting some club show by using other people's names to sell more tickets.



/jarmo

The current incarnation of GN'R couldn't reunite because they're ... current. That wouldn't be a reunion, that would be them playing a gig. To say that a potential reunion of Slash, Duff, Izzy, and Steven is a reunion of 4/5ths of the Appetite era Guns, the "classic" lineup, which is how it's been bandied about most everywhere, is accurate. This Rolling Stone cover will make it that much more impossible to promote the "new" band as Guns N' Roses because to Joe Public, the Guns are alive and well and if they roll out on tour or release their damn album, there they are on the cover of Rolling Stone. You know, Guns N' Roses. Axl, Slash....

[GeraldFord]

Ladies...

Can we stop arguing please? Guns N' Roses is on the cover of the new RS...How cool is that? It's good for BOTH the current lineup as well as Velvet Revolver. People will see the new RS, remember that album and perhaps say "hmm, maybe I should see what Slash and Duff are up to."

The cover might inspire also people to re-purchase AFD and check out the new CD when it arrives.

[novrain91]

1)  I don't know why, but I still think it's really cool that GNR got the Rollingstone cover (Even with the current state of the magazine and it's lack of credibility in recent years).  Fuck all those people who act like this is some kind of bad thing.  Be happy that one of your favorite bands got the cover!! 20 years later!!

2)  I hope this kicks Axl's ass into gear (assuming it already wasn't) concerning the release of Chinese Democracy.  I mean being on the cover of Rollingstone would be a great platform to start promoting the album and give a release date. 

3)  I think/hope this cover leads to some real ACTION.  Not just the touring.  Which is cool in its own way, but pretty pointless in  a way and it keeps them from moving forward in terms of new music and relevance.  I respect the current band, etc but nothing matters without new music.

[LunsJail]

1)? I don't know why, but I still think it's really cool that GNR got the Rollingstone cover (Even with the current state of the magazine and it's lack of credibility in recent years).? Fuck all those people who act like this is some kind of bad thing.? Be happy that one of your favorite bands got the cover!! 20 years later!!

2)? I hope this kicks Axl's ass into gear (assuming it already wasn't) concerning the release of Chinese Democracy.? I mean being on the cover of Rollingstone would be a great platform to start promoting the album and give a release date.?

3)? I think/hope this cover leads to some real ACTION.? Not just the touring.? Which is cool in its own way, but pretty pointless in? a way and it keeps them from moving forward in terms of new music and relevance.? I respect the current band, etc but nothing matters without new music.

Great points.  I also think it's cool they put the whole original band on the cover and not just an Axl pic or Axl n' Slash cover.  All those guys contributed to the greatness of AFD.

[wadey]

the only thing thats gonna kick axls arse into gear is axl and only axl
regardless of what anniversary it is,  what year it is etc etc, the release of chinese democracy has no relevance to the past and in my opinion it deserves to get released with no connection to anything apart from the release of chinese democracy. it shouldnt get released because its the 20 anniversary, or its the month illusions came out, or its this or that.

[wolftread]

You're the one creating confusion.

You spent a whole thread talking about how Slash/Duff/Izzy and Steven are creating confusion among GNR fans and the public because the media is billing it as a GNR reunion minus Axl, and now you are arguing that Axl appearing on the cover of a major rock publication with 4 guys not in GNR calling them GNR doesn't do the same? Celebrating Appetite is one thing, but plastering old photos on the cover and calling it GNR when that is not the case can't be seen favorably among GNR fans.

Please pay attention!

There cannot be a Guns N' Roses reunion minus Axl because Guns N' Roses is Axl, Tommy, Dizzy, Robin, Richard, Ron, Chris and Frank.

Are you saying Tommy, Dizzy, Robin, Richard, Ron, Chris and Frank are playing a show?

The cover and article is about an era in the band's history. It's not about promoting some club show by using other people's names to sell more tickets.



/jarmo

So can we infer from your comment regarding the current members of Guns n' Roses that Brain is officially out of the band?  At least we could put one topic to bed.

[HBK]

I don't agree.? I think people will see the cover and be "Appetite was great.? What about that new album?"

It creates confusion as Jarmo has said. He saw GNR last week in Japan, and it was not the line-up that is on that cover. Covers like that only serve to stoke nostalgia in people and remind them that GNR now is not the line-up that recorded the greatest album in rock history. It makes Axl's job to sell the new line-up that much harder when a major publication keeps throwing stuff like this in his face.

You're the one creating confusion.

The cover is celebrating 20 years since the release of Appetite For Destruction.

Guns N' Roses played a bunch of those songs at the shows I saw in Japan, and the fans fucking loved the shows.




/jarmo

Absoluty True !!!

 

HBK *

[Verse Chorus Verse]

Anyone else notice how fuckin' cool Izzy looks in that pic

He's Izzy, he always looks cool.

[Deniz]

I came here to find scans of this amazing thing but i can't believe ppl are complaining about even this.No this is not a promotion of the new gn'r, it has nothing to do with the new gn'r or axl releasing Chidem.

It might help advertise what the orijinal members are doing today (like mentioning ChiDem and Libertad) but thats not what it's meant to do.Don't worry you'll get your ChiDem cover once it's released.And people will go ''o yeah, this was the band i saw last year, duh''.

This is a celebration of the original GN'R, which we all know and love.I can't understand why some ppl here are trying to bury this legend which btw got us hooked up to this at the first place, just so the general public can recognise the new gn'r as a real band.That is not up to RS or any mag.It's up to the group releasing and playing their own material.

[PhillyRiot]

Great to see the original 5 on the cover.  Guns N' Roses is just a name, so it doesn't matter what you refer them as.   These 5 people on the cover made the best rock I have ever heard.

[odd1]

You're the one creating confusion.

You spent a whole thread talking about how Slash/Duff/Izzy and Steven are creating confusion among GNR fans and the public because the media is billing it as a GNR reunion minus Axl, and now you are arguing that Axl appearing on the cover of a major rock publication with 4 guys not in GNR calling them GNR doesn't do the same? Celebrating Appetite is one thing, but plastering old photos on the cover and calling it GNR when that is not the case can't be seen favorably among GNR fans.

Please pay attention!

There cannot be a Guns N' Roses reunion minus Axl because Guns N' Roses is Axl, Tommy, Dizzy, Robin, Richard, Ron, Chris and Frank.

Are you saying Tommy, Dizzy, Robin, Richard, Ron, Chris and Frank are playing a show?





/jarmo

Hahaha thats funny.

Guns n Roses = Axl Rose

[Bruno Poeys]

You're the one creating confusion.

You spent a whole thread talking about how Slash/Duff/Izzy and Steven are creating confusion among GNR fans and the public because the media is billing it as a GNR reunion minus Axl, and now you are arguing that Axl appearing on the cover of a major rock publication with 4 guys not in GNR calling them GNR doesn't do the same? Celebrating Appetite is one thing, but plastering old photos on the cover and calling it GNR when that is not the case can't be seen favorably among GNR fans.

Please pay attention!

There cannot be a Guns N' Roses reunion minus Axl because Guns N' Roses is Axl, Tommy, Dizzy, Robin, Richard, Ron, Chris and Frank.

Are you saying Tommy, Dizzy, Robin, Richard, Ron, Chris and Frank are playing a show?





/jarmo

Hahaha thats funny.

Guns n Roses = Axl Rose

no, Guns N' Roses is Axl Rose, Tommy, Finck, Fortus, BBF, Frank, Dizzy and Chris.

[CSS]

ZING!

Guns N' Roses is a band, good work figuring that one out...