You are not logged in. Please register or login.

#1871 Re: Dust N' Bones & Cyborg Slunks » Velvet Revolver Still Mulling New Frontman » 824 weeks ago

Like it or not, Slash doesn't go down too well in extended working relationships with 'strong' frontmen. Obviously, he's only had two such situations, and at both times, the frontmen in question are well-known for their, ahem, 'challenging' characteristics. Still, many if not most frontmen are like that to varying degrees, anyway. In that sense, he's like Izzy, only Slash still gets a kick out of the circus that goes into being on a certain level as a professional musician. The VR Mk. 1 was obviously a hard road for him, starting with him guitar turned down in the mix, leading to a drug addiction. And he kept a brave face throughout and only told 'the truth about Scott' after Scott was well and gone.

To his credit, Slash always wants to have a simple band, which releases albums and tours on a regular basis. The downside is that he's sometimes hard to get lit up, to really pull some passion into his work; Snakepit had some of that, as do some VR tracks. But he's still to be inspired to the heights to which Axl inspired him. The solo album may prove to be the thing that finally separates him from his GNR legacy and really put new wind on his sail. If so, Slash could reunite VR as his band, more or less.

If the solo album is a hit, VR becomes the Slash band. Duff becomes the legendary lieutenant of the guitar god. In that climate, you can't have a vocalist like Scott or Axl. Perez would do well, he'd allow Slash to mark his own territory and would gladly pay due to the established rhythm section. He'd be around the same level as Kushner in the band hierarchy, though in time, he might move a level up to Sorum's side. Which is a bit sad, btw.

Slash putting his neck out there with his own album is currently the best thing going for VR. Mark my words, the top-hat is what they may very well be profiled on in the times to come.

#1872 Re: Dust N' Bones & Cyborg Slunks » Velvet Revolver Still Mulling New Frontman » 824 weeks ago

Back on topic, I'm going to make a wild guess. Slash will tour behind his solo album starting from March/April '10, going through the summer. No surprise there, as the situation is like a Snakepit Mk. 1 Redux - he was certainly disgruntled when Geffen cut his tour 'short'. But. He's going to be playing some Snakepit, GNR and VR material. Therefore...

Franky Perez is, ominously enough, in an Eric Dover/Jellyfish situation with Scars on Broadway. Recruited as backing vocalist/rhythm guitarist for SoB, he's had the chance to try out the lead vocalist spot with Slash. He may even be featured on the album. Given that Perez may be both available and willing, he might turn out to be the frontman of Slash's solo band.

Going with this assumption, Franky would have a chance to earn his spurs as a frontman in Slash's band, trying out the VR songs and honing his vocal style to accommodate that of Weiland's. Since Slash's band is likely to be a loose outfit, guest appearances by VR members are all the more likely, adding up to the possibility of trying out their stage chemistry with Perez.

By then, Perez would have some additional credibility as Slash's vocalist and the transition to VR would be easier, particularly as he'd be 'Slash's boy', to put it nicely. Slash'd be the one who gave him the big break and he'd be sure to play nice for the duration of his stint.

Slash will either get VR back together or do another solo album, but I doubt he'll rest on his laurels for too long after his tour.

#1873 Re: The Sunset Strip » Rob Zombie's Halloween 2 » 824 weeks ago

Anyone interested as to why H2 was in such great demand not from an audience, but a production company perspective, should have a go at the New York Times feature on the Weinstein bros., the men behind the franchise reboot.

Since opening its doors in 2005, the Weinstein Company has released about 70 films, and more than one quarter of them failed to break the $1 million box-office mark in the United States. Thirteen of these took in less than $100,000.

... They were corralled in 2005 by Goldman Sachs, which helped raise $1 billion for the company. At the time, filmmaking had acquired a certain cachet in private equity circles, and here was a chance to bankroll what were arguably two of the greatest movie producers in modern cinematic history.

... SO what happened? In part, the Weinstein Company is coping with the same problems facing every other studio, most notably the grim slowdown of the DVD market. But plenty of the Weinsteins’ wounds are also self-inflicted. Instead of using their lush, Goldman-fueled pile of start-up money to focus on filmmaking, the brothers ventured into such new realms as fashion (buying part of Halston, the once-storied label), online social networking (through A Small World, known informally as MySpace for Millionaires) and a piece of Ovation, the cable network.


... The first eight months of this year have been particularly dreadful for the Weinsteins. They have released only four films, in a limited number of theaters, and they have so far brought in a total of $1.3 million domestically. In their Miramax days, the brothers often earned many times that figure on a Friday night.

... the Weinsteins’ flop-to-jackpot ratio has been high enough to prompt the brothers to hire Miller Buckfire & Company, financial advisers who help troubled clients restructure. Last week, the firm finished its review and is urging Team Weinstein to release and promote only 10 movies a year, unload unpromising titles from its film library and avoid empire-building.

To shore up their finances, the brothers received a bridge loan a few months ago estimated at $75 million from Ziff Brothers Investments, according to two people familiar with the loan who requested anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly about it. - NYT


It's a dirty, dirty pool, and filmmakers like Zombie and average horror film fans are the ones getting the shortest shrifts.

As always, there's more into the story then what meets the eye. Naturally, it doesn't necessitate a surge of re-evaluation into Zombie's contributions to the series, but should serve as a healthy reminder that when talking about studios and franchises, films are created and molded with more than merely creative decisions and reasonings.

#1874 Re: The Sunset Strip » Rob Zombie's Halloween 2 » 824 weeks ago

The industry scuttlebutt is that Zombie originally signed on to Halloween to gain a release outlet through the Weinstein company for his animation project, El Superbeasto. Then the animation got delayed again, but Zombie was still contractually obligated for a Halloween sequel (which basically means the Weinsteins were able to pull his leash to come down and get to it after others had failed).

A recent article on H2 is rather.... unsettling.

Just when he thought he was out, however, Zombie found himself lured back in to salvage a troubled production. "Halloween II," written and directed by Zombie, opens Friday. ... He signed on to write a new script from scratch last December and hustled to get the picture completed in time for summer.

...The movie was unfinished even as the studio launched its marketing campaign. There were frequent rewrites on set and the movie may be cut in a way that veers away from the original plot line, according to Dourif.

"I know they are reshaping the film quite a bit," says Dourif, who portrays Sheriff Brackett. "I'll be interested to see what he finally came up with. We'll see if it works. There's a possibility it won't work, but Rob pulled the last rabbit out of the hat pretty good."

...Two weeks before release, Zombie was racing to finish the film, even as he and the cast started to promote it. There was 11th hour sound mixing to take care of.

..."He's really been under the gun, and I think it's been very hard on him," says Dourif. "He's been playing catchup the whole time and it's a risky thing what he's trying to do, making the movie more character-driven than what's normal for a horror film."

- NJ.com

#1875 Re: Guns N' Roses » The GnREvolution Q&A with Ron "Bumblefoot" Thal » 824 weeks ago

monkeychow wrote:

Fortus is one of those great 'all rounder' type guitarists to me, people will no doubt start up in a moment about how he is a session guy and whatever else, as if that means he's average, when being a wordlcass session guy actually requires a very very high level of musicianship and technical ability on your chosen instrument.

No doubt Fortus is a similar professional as, say, Josh Freese. The fact that he gains regular employment as a recording/touring member speaks for itself, as does his versatility when it comes to the artists he works with. You're very much in the right in the sense that it takes a lot of technical skill (as well as people skill) to jump into an act, claim your pocket, merge within the sound and get organic on click. If you can do it, you're set for a career.

The problem with Fortus is that he's... well, impersonable. There's not much distinctive character to go around as far as his musicianship is concerned, because the guy's a chameleon. This, naturally, comes out as a necessity due to the nature of his chosen profession. He may carry the Stones influence on his sleeve like half the rock guitarists on the planet, but how genuine is that as opposed to his work with Rihanna or Nena?

Tommy does sessions and soundtracks as well, but his background in Replacements puts him on a completely different chart. I know, Fortus had the Richard Butler bands, but I'm still hard-pressed to see them as featuring any more of his own self as the latter-day groups like GNR. Tommy, however, contributed to The Mats' sound from the get-go, left markings everywhere, and thus, ensured musical identity and credibility which are difficult to ignore.

Robin, for all his technical shortcomings (at least earlier on), had NIN, which during the Downward Spiral days was particularly earnest and insistent in terms of musical integrity and live performance. Pitman's cool even by TooL association alone. Brain and Bucket had, well... Would be easier to list things they didn't have by the time they made it into GNR.


monkeychow wrote:

For my money, while paul is clearly a good writer, Fortus brings an exciting stage presence and very reliabile live abilities to the band, and i'm glad he's a member.

The funny thing is that while Fortus is not without his strengths, he's featured on the album much, much less than Paul Huge. Hell, he's been in the band since 2002 and even Ron outweights him in the liner notes!

With all due respect to his readily-apparent abilities, I consider Fortus a live member, like Frank, who did a few touches on the album. Not a significant contributor in the studio outfit by any stretch. Late arrival is not a valid excuse; Bucket and Brain have songwriting credits, and their songs do not feature Paul Huge - and Paul is practically on every song written during his time. The funny thing is, Fortus is absent as well. Robin, Ron and/or Bucket do a lot of rhythm parts.

The 2001 lineup with Ron would be something to behold as the new live act if we can't have Bucket aboard. It would bring out a real band instead of replacements (aside the obvious one) and might not even be hard to accomplish. Paul's hardly a busy man in terms of music, Robin will have his NIN tenure soon come to a close, Brain might be up for touring again.

Nothing personal against Fortus (or Frank - or Ashba), but having the original studio crew performing the CD songs as a tight unit would be better than anything Axl's current lineup (whatever it may now be) can offer - simply because they are the guys chiefly responsible for their respective parts, they know how to pull it off.


Instead, we get Mr Energizer Bunny not telling us about a cover of X Japan. You're sometimes really pushing it, Richie.

#1876 Re: Guns N' Roses » Guns N' Roses New Myspace Bulletin » 824 weeks ago

gnfnraxl wrote:

Actually.  What does this Del James look like.  Seriously never seen this clown err I mean guy.

Well...

Here's a Del James.

--

19

#1877 Re: Guns N' Roses » Guns N' Roses New Myspace Bulletin » 824 weeks ago

You'll notice there's two camps of writers in that project.

Aussie wrote:

Dark Delicacies III: Haunted features contributions from Kevin J. Anderson, Clive Barker, Richard Christian Matheson, David Morrell, and Chuck Palahniuk, and many other great writers.

There's the 'name' writers. They can't be arsed to attend the signing, aside RC Matheson, who's mostly A-listed through recognizability; his dad's an insanely good scribe.


The B-list of those forgettable enough to attend include

authors Del James, Heather Graham, Michael Boatman, Mick Garris, R. C. Matheson, Victor Salva, Eric Red, Maria Alexander, and others to be announced.

Horror film buffs will recognize Garris, Red and Salva. The former two had their brief hey-day well over a decade ago. Having not seen the Jeepers Creepers', can't really comment on Salva, but judging by his company, his elevator doesn't go too far up.


Can't blame Del for trying to scrounge some advertisement, it may be embarrassing enough as it is. Only downside is that he's turning GNR into part of the joke.

Which is something GNR has never needed any help with.


This will make top news on certain GNR fansites. The horror... The horror...

#1878 Re: Guns N' Roses » Chinese Democracy Chart Positions Thread » 824 weeks ago

Ah, but don't underestimate Irving Azoff's part in the last verse of this Great Rock N' Roll Swindle. Our man Axl walked Geffen/Interscope around like dogs in leashes for a decade before they decided to call his bluff and cancel funding. Ultimately, it was Azoff who came to Axl's rescue and pulled off the unthinkable - a deal that would guarantee Axl and Uni their money back. Obviously, this meant somebody else had to be conned into it, and BestBuy was simply gullible enough to bite the bullet (just like ClearChannel in 2001, when Goldstein/Merck sold them the idea of a GNR North American tour).

In that sense, the whole CD saga is a marvel to behold; Axl & co spent years pulling money off from various sources, artificially creating a demand for something that would never be directly supplied. How much of this was financial wizardry a la Goldman-Sachs (read the Rolling Stone article to boggle your mind), and how much plain coincidence, circumstances and insane bravado is obviously open season for revisionist historians. Regardless, the capital moved through the GNR brand in the past 15 years is, in total, way beyond the $13 million most people are stuck up with - the more important thing is, where did most of the money go?

Take it from me, you need to describe the CD saga somehow, try this: People barricaded themselves behind the GNR brand name (THE biggest band of the early 90's) and stuck around long enough to run away with suitcases loaded with money. The advance alone for making the album was said to the absolutely-amazing $10 Million; and this was included to the renegotiated record deal back in around '91, when 10 million meant a hell of a lot more. It's not a case of Axl screwing the industry, it's about a lot of people taking advantage of how much the GNR brand was valued by the record company and the music industry in general.

Axl just may have enough to preserve a livelihood of his current standards and preferences after releasing CD; there just might've been a lucrative contractual fee waiting for him as soon as the album would've been turned in. What would Universal of today care? They got their money back, more or less, capital they most likely never expected to recover, particularly as in the last decade, digital downloads have soared while record sales have twindled. All and all, it's a terrible thing to get away with.

GNR is still worth a lot of money and would be worth even more with Slash. A lot of people will tolerate Axl and his vanity project because of the fact that when he comes to town, he often brings the money with him.

#1879 Re: Guns N' Roses » Super-Speculative Reunion Thread. » 824 weeks ago

russtcb wrote:

Why does everyone always apologize when they agree with Buzz?? 16

Even though it was a joke, I might say it's not because of Buzz's personality per se, rather than the fact that by agreeing with him on anything within the subject matter means you're adopting a rather glum take on the current status of the band. That status, while agreeing with Buzz, is sad to acknowledge.

CD release should've marked a big fanfare - hell, we basically had our private 'fan-fair' with the Skwerl leaks several months prior. Everybody was excited to get the music and hear it for ourselves. The BestBuy dumping and Axl not touring, GNR not reconquering a place in modern rock, the band members not getting their overdue respect in public... Just disappointing.

russtcb wrote:

For me, Robin was the constant.

He was the oldest surviving recruit of the reconstruction and should've been there to promote the album, both on and off-stage. 'Should've' is a relative term, as no real promotion took place.

But he definitely deserved better than what he ultimately got, which was a 'Get out of Jail Free' card from Reznor. Over a decade went past, and that's what he got. From Axl, he got nothing after his work was done.

#1880 Re: Guns N' Roses » Super-Speculative Reunion Thread. » 824 weeks ago

I'm sorry to say Buzz actually has a point there.

If we step outside the entire 'defining members' discussion and measure the existence of GNR based on their overall activity as a recording/touring entity, we realize they were on life support in '97 (though still ticking with info on Robin, Moby, et al). In the following years, they sprang to life in full gear, having a full lineup locked down, releasing tracks, Axl doing interviews, etc. After the '02 tour they waned, after Bucket left in 2004 they pretty much died on us. They had a temporary spark flying through 06-07, and various signs of life in '08.

This year? They rehearsed in the spring, then died on us again.

May '09 looks a lot like March '04.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB