JULY 18TH, Sheffield, England, Hallam fm arena!!!! UK tour stop 1!!!

[joneslloyd]

I don't think the review is that bad

All the people above bashed him as it's not what they wanted to hear (presumably "Axl put on an amazing show, and sounds amazing and/or just as he did 'back in the day').

The guy has an opinion.

Surely we can agree / disagree with it sensibly, by bringing up a good, solid counter-arguement, instead of saying "he writes like a highschool kid" or something of the like. It doesn't show that what the guy has written is incorrect. To me it just shows that the people above are on major losing streaks with things to say, so resort to critiscising the fine details of the review.

[mikepatton]

Look at it from the critics point of view...Axl is the ONLY Original member left...Axl really should have just changed the name to the Axl Rose Project or something..............Then people wouldnt complain about no duff or slash...................and calling Baz ?a skid row muppet....HAHAHAHAHAHA...that is actually true...i know some of you guys are hair metal worshippers driving around in your camaro's and denim jackets but be honest, Sebastian is basically regarded as a hair metal/glam has been.....skid row was outdated by 1992........Sebastian is as relevant as Jani Lane or Bret Michaels........and Baz was always an Axl impersonator...............................as for dissing axls voice-i dont dig that cuz his voice sounds great......if this guy wants to diss axls voice listen to the 02 soundboards

[xxrosesxx]

This review is well written but  full of envy, negative energy and bitterness. Really made me feel unconfortable. I wonder why this man has been so negative towards the idea of this gig he was attending, right from the first moment.

[Mr Bootlegs]

Something calling itself "Guns N' Roses" - the original members, in a massive breach of metal etiquette which states that vocalists are the most disposable element in any band, signed the rights to the name over to their lead singer in return for a wad of dollars - is back for the first British tour in a dozen years.

I know this guy's a dick (most NME people are), but how can anyone dispute that statement. We KNOW that's what happened, and if it wasn't for that Axl wouldn't have the name anymore, and therefore there's no way he would play a set made almost entirely up of old songs. Don't get me wrong though, i blame Slash and Duff for signing over the rights, just as much as Axl for even asking fro them.

While I have no problem with Axl calling this GNR, I still think he should've called it something else

I'm of the same opinion mate.

[babydolls]

I knocked the review because I just dont think its a well-written review - it seems very paint by numbers to me.  his actual opinion doesnt bother me (each to his own etc) - but this review is more of a bad summary rather than a thought-provoking, interesting review.  I see no point in sending goth has-beens to review gigs that they dont give two hoots about.  I'm not disputing the facts of the past.

It's not that I'm naive enough to think that all reviews will be a perfect thesis - but this just seems to be a quick note on the way home type affair.

 

[Dr. Blutarsky]

I agree with a few of you here. It is not a sin to give GNR a bad review if indeed the reviewer felt the show was not up to par or something. But this guy Simon Price does not back up his criticisim. Why was Baz a muppet? Finck looks nothing like Slash. And calling GNR hair metal?  Anybody who has listened or seen GNR know this is no hair metal band. I also agree it looks like this was written before the guy even attended the show. No comments on how the band actually played, he answers none of the questions many people may wonder about that may not be familiar with the new band like: were the new guitarists any good? Is Bumblefoot talented? How is the new band different musically than the old? Basic questions.  To call this a review is pathetic. It just slams GNR without any real basis other than this guy's opinion. Do we really care what his personal opinion is? Give us a reason why the show was so bad besides personal bias. You know the saying, opinions are like assholes.....everybody has one.

[Thorazine Shuffle]

That review was uncalled for.  NO band deserves a review like that.

[Nayl]

? I don't care much one way or the other about his review hell 90% of the bands I have enjoyed my enitre life have always been tore apart by critics.

Point is this Gun's is selling out shows,most ppl who go to those shows leave loving it and the band is sounding great.

Ever since they have started this tour 95% of all the reviews have been negative yet night after night they are selling out I somehow doubt the band gives a shit about what some critic thinks.

Guns N Roses is rock n roll it's not supposed to be pretty nor is most mainstream people supposed to like it it's not trendy if all the reviewers loved Gun's I would seriously begin to worry more about the state of the band and there sound than I do now cause a few faggy rviewers took sme cheap shots.

[Baby Chaos]

Simon Price 

He wrote a great book on the Manics (A Secret History of the Manic Street Preachers) but his views seem at odds with his praise of the Manics material post Richey, which saw them wear dour social-worker-esque clothes and put on loads of weight.

Calling Axl fat seems a pointless low blow, consdering how much bigger James Dean Bradfield is then him.

Price is upset he's stuck more in the past than Axl could possibly be.

Bye Simon! 

[RichardNixon]

I didn't think that was such a bad review, I've seen far far worse. I think the reviewer had a great time, but is too much of an elitist prick to say so.

[RichardNixon]

I love how they keep calling him fat, no matter what. Where do these "critics" get their ideas from? Karl Rove?

[Elrothiel]

Seriously, is that guy a writer?

He sounds like a whiny little emoid asshole with a grudge against Axl because S and D aren't in the band anymore. Big fuckin' deal. Wah wah wah! GET OVER IT ALREADY!

Yea, EMOID. Emoid because he can't help but just complain through the whole review, whilst pathetically trying to cover up the whininess with clich?d attempts at a little thing called "humor" but failing miserably.

He just sounds like he's trying to spit out the bitterness that he's got from sucking on Slash's balls for too long.

SIMON PRICE, NEWSFLASH, this is NOT the old band, GET OVER IT ALREADY!

[axlsalinger]

I really don't care if someone writes a negative review about GNR, as long as it's well-written and they have something to say. Unfortunately, with this review, that is simply not the case. This is one of those reviews where partway through you think, this guy didn't like the show and I'm curious as to why, halfway through you want to grab him by the scruff of his shirt to say why are you making such ridiculous points, and by the end you realize the article is so lame it's not worth the bother. Any kid coming out of the arena could have written a better review, good or bad, than this one.

This guy should be embarrassed that he put his name to this drivel in a public forum.

[Meanmachine22]

seems like GNR can't win against the press.
As stated before: It's one thing to give a bad review because they fucked up a show and giving a bad review because  it is not the old band.... How many bands are out having great success and and don't appear in the original line up???RHCP, Metallica, the Cure, NIN...to name but a few....

Axl still has the reputation: "Bad ass motherfucker".
It is a shame that critics can't write an objective review. My theory for that is very far fetched:
Every little fucking review/critic bitch deep insides want to give the world the middlefinger exactly like Axl does. And because Axl does and they lost their spirit and youth along the way is the reason the write such shit.. Because they are bitter and frustrated and (maybe) jealous.They wish they had the balls to be like the idiot they are blaming for putting up a so called freakshow
The reality is these fuckers are in vain about relating to Guns because deep inside they wish that they never lost the leatherjacket and changed it for glasses and a suit... but that's just a theory 

[joneslloyd]

I really don't care if someone writes a negative review about GNR, as long as it's well-written and they have something to say. Unfortunately, with this review, that is simply not the case. This is one of those reviews where partway through you think, this guy didn't like the show and I'm curious as to why, halfway through you want to grab him by the scruff of his shirt to say why are you making such ridiculous points, and by the end you realize the article is so lame it's not worth the bother. Any kid coming out of the arena could have written a better review, good or bad, than this one.

This guy should be embarrassed that he put his name to this drivel in a public forum.

exactly

[Naupis]

How many bands are out having great success and and don't appear in the original line up???RHCP, Metallica, the Cure, NIN...to name but a few....

Out of that list though, how many of those bands have only one original member in them? Beyond the numbers count will always be the problem that Slash took on an almost mythical stature as far as GNR was concerned given his contributions to the band and the rock n' roll image that he brought to the table. He was the epitome of everything a larger than life guitarist was, just as Axl was the epitome of a classic front man. For many people, GNR was a 2 man show, and no one would say boo if it was Axl, Slash and a totally new band.

Everyone who is getting wound up about the sometimes poor reviews should brace themselves for CD's reviews, because they will probably all be in the same vein. In fact, I would bet many are already written without having heard the album.

I suspect Axl could care less about these reviews though because he is more interested in using the name to headline shows, sell-out arenas and move albums than he is critical acclaim. Otherwise this band would not be called GNR, as he knew that such a great degree of negativity and polarity would be associated with keeping the name.

[Origen]

Some of you should lighten up, it's a pretty much bad review, so what? don't cry/whinge  about it. The important thing is that the fans who actually attended the show enjoyed it.

"Don't Cry" is the sound of the unrepentant bad guy repenting, and Rose's failure/refusal to actually sing it is baffling.

It baffles us all 

[Annie]

Axl does not look 44! And if I may quote Garfield, "UP Your nose with Axl Rose!" Mr mean-spirited reviewer man!

[Neemo]

How many bands are out having great success and and don't appear in the original line up???RHCP, Metallica, the Cure, NIN...to name but a few....

Out of that list though, how many of those bands have only one original member in them?

Well NIN was always just Trent with hired hands, no?

and the Cure is just Robert Smith now i believe but don't quote me on it...

RHCP have only Kiedis and Flea that are orig....and Metallica are just James and Lars as orig

[nesquick]

s.price@independent.co.uk
e-mail of the journalist who wrote the review...