Chinese Democracy Review Thread

[BlowUpYourVideo]

Don't know if it's been mentioned, but Q magazine also gave it 2/5.

The UK press are being fairly harsh on CD. I apologise on their behalf. I hope Classic Rock will give it something resembling a positive review...

[AxlReznor]

Don't know if it's been mentioned, but Q magazine also gave it 2/5.

The UK press are being fairly harsh on CD. I apologise on their behalf. I hope Classic Rock will give it something resembling a positive review...

I think this could settle the whole debate about whether or not good reviews mean better sales figures.  Most of the world has been giving largely positive reviews, and they all appear to have large sales figures.  But in this shithole of a country, there have been more bad reviews than good, and lo and behold, The Killers are outselling them by over 40,000 copies.  It's annoying me, tremendously.

[The Catcher]

Fuck Q.
Classic Rock is one of the few mags with half a brain, I expect them to post a decent review.

[The Catcher]

A five star review from the British Press! 

http://www.thelondonpaper.com/cs/Satellite/london/music/article/1157156729362?packedargs=suffix%3DSubSectionArticle

Now that's what I'm talking about!

[estebanf]

Chinese Democracy was reviewed last monday by the biggest argentine newspaper, ''Clar?n''.

The review said a lot of bullshit, not worth, basically because the reviewer didnt know a damn shit about the band.

Anyway, here's the cover:

[ToonGuns]

Don't know if it's been mentioned, but Q magazine also gave it 2/5.

The UK press are being fairly harsh on CD. I apologise on their behalf. I hope Classic Rock will give it something resembling a positive review...

Is there a link to the Q review anywhere?

[GNR_Green]

Q - another pointless rag I stopped looking at years ago.  They probably think James Blunt's good, so go figure...

[Red1]

I'll be interested to see the Classic Rock review.  What we all have to remember is that there are 'politics' involved in journalism.  Just to throw my two pence worth in....

If I were Classic Rock Magazine I would be pretty pissed off that after showing years or support to Axl, including full backing of the new band and continuous positive coverage of GNR, that GNR's management then give the exclusive 'own the first copy in the UK' competition to the likes of Kerrang - who have been nothing but negative about GNR for years. 

I reckon they'll give it a good review, but I think that GNR/Management should look at things like this next time.

[its_so_easy]

http://www.virginmedia.com/music/reviews/albumreviews/gunsnroses-chinesedemocracy.php


By Johnny Dee


17 years in the making Axl finally releases his masterpiece

Such is the amount of time, artistic freedom and money Axl Rose has lavished on this album that it would be no surprise to learn that he?d taught a dolphin to play keyboards and had enlisted the services of the Dalai Lama to produce it. At times it sounds more than possible.

Having been greeted on a par with the raising of the Titanic, the actual reality was never going to be as good (or bad) as many imagined. But the shocking truth of this sprawling, elaborate 77 minute epic is that it's closer to Andrew Lloyd Weber than the hard rocking Guns N' Roses we remember from all those years ago.

Yes, it's a laboured, pseudo musical maze ? every instrument, every technique and doubtless every guitarist in the state of California as well as Brian May is here - but in every overwrought track there's a genuinely great track struggling to emerge (Catcher In The Rye, Better, There Was A Time stand out over the first few plays). Once you acclimatize to Rose?s huge ambition and accept its mad grandiosity Chinese Democracy becomes an enjoyable monster.

I love it ? especially the dolphin solo


****

[demo23nz]

Don't know if it's been mentioned, but Q magazine also gave it 2/5.

The UK press are being fairly harsh on CD. I apologise on their behalf. I hope Classic Rock will give it something resembling a positive review...

I think this could settle the whole debate about whether or not good reviews mean better sales figures.  Most of the world has been giving largely positive reviews, and they all appear to have large sales figures.  But in this shithole of a country, there have been more bad reviews than good, and lo and behold, The Killers are outselling them by over 40,000 copies.  It's annoying me, tremendously.

Per head of population though, midweek sales numbers actually suggest Chi Dem is selling just as well in Britain is it is in the US. It's just that the Killers are really damn popular over here.

[The Estranged MrFlashbax]

http://music.ign.com/articles/933/933276p1.html

[Ali]

http://music.ign.com/articles/933/933276p1.html

I knew that was coming from that guy.  I remember his review of "Shackler's Revenge", complete with a diatribe about the old band, Axl keeping the name, etc.  Predictable.

Ali

[TomFriend]

James Rolfe, a.k.a. The Angry Video Game Nerd has posted a review on his site:

http://www.cinemassacre.com/new/?p=572

[gcluskey]

James Rolfe, a.k.a. The Angry Video Game Nerd has posted a review on his site:

http://www.cinemassacre.com/new/?p=572

I love this guy, he's fuckin hilarious in some of his videos. That's not a bad review from him

[riotact_vancity]

James Rolfe, a.k.a. The Angry Video Game Nerd has posted a review on his site:

http://www.cinemassacre.com/new/?p=572

...and the real reason why Axl shouldnt have called it Guns N Roses. Not because Slash et al weren there, but because it is impossible to not equate GnR 2.0 with the old band, which means the music is listened thru the prism of AFD/ Illusions, hoping for the follow up to those. Therefore Axl cant really pursue his vision, which is ironic...I dont want the old band to reunite because there would be no bigger disappointment than if they got back together and released a new album, which would inevitably be mediocre.

but of course, Axl couldnt get the $13 million to make the album without it being a Guns N Roses album. No one gets big $ for solo albums; John Lennon could pull a Lazarus and wouldnt get more than a couple million for a solo album. So Axl backed himself into a corner by needing the money, yet ensured that the music could never live up to the hype, because it wasnt really a Guns N Roses album...because he wanted to reimagine the music, reimagine the aura of the band.

these reviews that mention Axl isnt trying to reinvent GnR are completely off base because he obviously is. When you replace everybody, for reasons pertaining to their unwillingness to break new ground, you are by definition reinventing. But the public at large wont let him reinvent GnR because we're left with GnR at its peak, with the legend still mighty.

the sad part is that the music on CD which seeks to reinvent and push to greater and different heights is brilliant. If the World, Sorry, Prostitute showcase what i feel is an evolution of rock, a willingness and ability to put these other musical forces into a song as a driver of the song. not just as a gimmick. But those songs arent Guns n Roses and will never be accepted as such, regardless of its genius. Even a song like IRS, which i love, has elements which on the surface would appeal to old GnR fans, but will get stuck because it's not really Guns N Roses, and there's no way to make it such, no matter the revealed brilliance. A lot, if not most, on this board will never accept that because we bow at the altar of Axl. I've read posts on here still believing that Axl is 5 steps ahead of all of us and still has a grand scheme that will blow us all away. What if the fact is that Axl, for all his musical talent, is a man unable to come to grips with his failures and unwilling to admit he cant overcome himself? What if he is a man just like all of us, caught in our own dementia, but with the added element of massive sycophantic pressure from many sides? What if he just cant handle it? What if there is no master plan?

This record has spots of genius in it, and i would go as far as to compare the overall scope to Beethoven's Ninth, in that both had the ideas germinating for ages, both took all their influences and put it into a master work, both were reviled to a point in their time, and both were troubled, lonely, misunderstood and seemingly unable to cope with reality.

While i have been listening to this album non-stop for the past week, what should have been a triumphal time has become one of reflection on the signs we've seen. What should have been hasn't happened yet, and the chance has been lost. We got an album full of moments where you genuinely feel his pain, which juxtapose against moments where he blusters about not caving in, and kicking ass and being unstoppable. Yet i come away from the album sensing those moments are just that, bluster, while the real, anguished moments remain unresolved and very much a part of what drives the man.

[Continental Drift]

riotact_vancity,

I don't agree with everything you said- but damn... that was a great, well thought-out post. An enjoyable read. I particularly liked your comparison of Axl and Beethoven- one I have made with friends (and on this board) from time-to-time. I think it's spot on.

There are going to be so many different takes and interpretations on this album- and virtually none of them will be EXACTLY right. I think you make a lot of interesting points though.

After a week of listening- I really do come away feeling like this IS a true "Guns N' Roses" album though- at least at its core... and by "core" I mean the recorded performances of Axl, Robin Finck, Tobias/Fortus, Tommy Stinson, Brain and Dizzy Reed. It's very evident to me that Axl successfully rebuilt "Guns N' Roses" with that base IMHO. The very stripped down "This I Love" shows that the classic Guns N' Roses magic is alive and well- even without Slash, Duff, etc. What's interesting is, as we all know, that he decided to push the envelop even further by adding on the contributions of Buckethead, Bumblefoot, and Chris Pitman. I think their work, almost all of which is brilliant, is where the album veers off into new experimental ground that may or may not be received as "Guns N' Roses" by the masses. It works for me- but I'm sure many others will be hung up with it.

At the end of the day though- whatever the name stamped on the front- it's an absolutely beautiful piece of art IMHO- even if, as you suggest, it is the musings of a delusional, megalomaniac, deceived by sycophants and riddled with self-doubt that's never fully accepted or appreciated by the general public. It's STILL gorgeous for what it is IMHO and could very well go down as my favorite Guns N' Roses album of all time (running closely with Use Your Illusion II).

[Alfie Bones]

A positive review from The Epoch Times
http://en.epochtimes.com/n2/arts-entertainment/guns-n-roses-chinese-democracy-axl-rose-7706.html

I liked what he said about Better.


The headline page (SoCal edition)

The Epoch Times are the Falun Gong's newspaper. They have a reason to be biased in favor of the album, as it defends them and makes the Chinese government looks bad. 

[Grizzly]

The highly regarded Pitchfork gives 5.8 out of 10. Well written, worth a read.

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/node/147782

[Layne Staley's Sunglasses]

The highly regarded Pitchfork gives 5.8 out of 10. Well written, worth a read.

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/node/147782

Not even.  Once Mr. Ian Cohen brought up former members, I knew this review would go nowhere.

He didn't really review the album.  He found ways to slam the album for not having the former members on it, and he had grand expectations.  How he could mention Chuck Klosterman's April Fool's review and the Hindenberg in the same paragraph is beyond me.

Moving on...

[western_chaos]

The highly regarded Pitchfork gives 5.8 out of 10. Well written, worth a read.

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/node/147782

Extremely poor review, how any one could equate use your illusion to chinese democracy is beyond me...

He obviously did not listen to the same album as we did.