You are not logged in. Please register or login.

James
 Rep: 628 

Re: New Guns N Roses member Melissa Reese

James wrote:

Good to see you back Mitch.

Here's the problem for me....this whole reunion just took way too long to happen for me

JUst about everyone agrees with this. The CD saga should have been wrapped up eons ago(CD in 01, CD II in 03-04) and the reunion take place in 2006-07.

It just wasn't in the cards. We know it was considered in 05-06 but we don't know how genuine either side really was. The fact he was even wiling to entertain the idea says so much about his feelings on the new band at the time.

Recently Axl's ex manager said that Axl had opened the door to the possibility in 09-10 and no longer had any issues with Slash. THis is worse than the potential reunion of 05-06. It shows no album was coming and the past 5 years basicaly a waste. JUst coasting on fumes.

How long will it be before people start making fun of this band despite the reunion status? At least the Rolling Stones tried to create new music.

Give them a chance. Its only been months since this happened and months before that Fortus mentioned them working with some Slash riffs.

IMO they get a free pass on a new album in 2016. One new song this year would be incredible. 2017 is when fans will really know what direction this whole thing is headed. If we get no new material in 2017 then yeah...it had nothing to do with releasing music.

At least Traci and Roberta added something to the music that I could easily understand.

I love Tracy and Roberta...especially Tracy.  5 I wish I could've went to a show on that part of the tour.

When will people stop mistaking scantily clad women on a stage as artists or musicians.

That isn't a fair statement.

misterID wrote:

I heard that he didn't want to do the touring thing anymore.../

70517996f16c7a163c779805acad50e60cd683de3ff3089fd945c78d980e6f20.jpg


19

monkeychow
 Rep: 634 

Re: New Guns N Roses member Melissa Reese

monkeychow wrote:
James Lofton wrote:

IMO they get a free pass on a new album in 2016. One new song this year would be incredible. 2017 is when fans will really know what direction this whole thing is headed. If we get no new material in 2017 then yeah...it had nothing to do with releasing music.

I have no objection to them making cash, all bands make cash.

But I do think if the media is going to go with a "they're back" approach for them to be "back" they have to do something new musically.

I can't really explain what I mean. In 1991 Duff played attitude because he loves punk, and Slash played the godfather to get that soulful blues happening. It was organic based on their influences and their personalities. But today - in 2016 - if they play them it's because they once played them in 1991. But I want to know what slash's soul thinks now.....I mean obviously some recreation of hits is desirable, sensible and inevitable....


but for this band to be "back" they need to recapture the spontaneity, and do some new works or there's little point.

They've moved past their prime, but they still got enough juice to teach us something i'm sure....but the time is NOW.....2017 has side projects and an international tour planned already!

deadsouth
 Rep: 11 

Re: New Guns N Roses member Melissa Reese

deadsouth wrote:
mitchejw wrote:

Oh my god...I was concerned about the board filling up with not-so-deep thinking, overly giddy fan boys and girls who basically become Axl/GnR yes men.

Here's the problem for me....this whole reunion just took way too long to happen for me and I won't just be happy with whatever they throw out just bc it's the original half of the line up.

This choice for yet another completely random band member to serve in a role that I don't even really notice is absolutely nothing to me.

This, just like everything about this reunion thus far has been about one thing: CASH

The choice of this woman to perform this duty is nothing different - she's probably very cheap.

When will people stop mistaking scantily clad women on a stage as artists or musicians. At least Traci and Roberta added something to the music that I could easily understand.

How long will it be before people start making fun of this band despite the reunion status? At least the Rolling Stones tried to create new music.


Amen

Smoking Guns
 Rep: 328 

Re: New Guns N Roses member Melissa Reese

Smoking Guns wrote:

Anyone watch the video clip of Its So Easy. What the fuck is Melissa banging on the keys there. Seriously. Is she just banging in the keys apearinf to be playing and rocking out or is she really playing something. There are no keys or samples etc on Its So Easy and I can't hear anything she plays here. Was it for show or are there really keys on ISE.

misterID
 Rep: 460 

Re: New Guns N Roses member Melissa Reese

misterID wrote:

They played synth on every song since 2001.

Smoking Guns
 Rep: 328 

Re: New Guns N Roses member Melissa Reese

Smoking Guns wrote:
misterID wrote:

They played synth on every song since 2001.

m
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, what a fucking joke. Synth on ISE? That is cringe worthy.

zombux
 Rep: 36 

Re: New Guns N Roses member Melissa Reese

zombux wrote:

I quite agree that some songs need to be brought back to their roots and played with proper hard rock or punk rock vibe. keep the keyboards only for songs, where they are meaningful. let the keyboardist(s) do percussions or sub-bass on them, instead of bloating them with unneccessary layers. that must be Axl's obsession, putting more and more layers. even Chinese Democracy or Better could sound really fresh, if played like they were originally written - a raw grungy in your face rock anthem and tight rock hit. nothing more, nothing less.

misterID
 Rep: 460 

Re: New Guns N Roses member Melissa Reese

misterID wrote:
Smoking Guns wrote:
misterID wrote:

They played synth on every song since 2001.

m
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, what a fucking joke. Synth on ISE? That is cringe worthy.

What does it matter? You didn't care obviously for the last 14 years... Now it's an issue, suddenly.

Axlin16
 Rep: 768 

Re: New Guns N Roses member Melissa Reese

Axlin16 wrote:
A Private Eye wrote:
Axlin16 wrote:

Guns N' Roses is Axl Rose, Slash, Izzy Stradlin, Duff McKagan, Steven Adler, Matt Sorum & Dizzy Reed


According to the Rock Hall.

Who is the rock hall to determine who is or isn't a band anyway? Just cos they say so doesn't make it absolute.

Didn't Axl raise that very question himself when he didn't go? It's an award ceremony but has no meaning beyond that.


I used the Rock Hall as a reference because all GN'R reunionite nerds consider Axl, Slash, Izzy, Duff, Steven, Matt and even fucking Gilby to be -- Guns N' Roses.


But Dizzy always gets the shaft. Then they take out Dizzy, take a shit on Frank or others, and my point always always been you can't pick and choose. We either gotta go with ALL OF THEM, or we've gotta go back the Rock Hall definition of the AFD/UYI-era being GN'R (which I don't necessarily disagree with), which includes Dizzy.


It just seems to me , people pick and choose.

Axlin16
 Rep: 768 

Re: New Guns N Roses member Melissa Reese

Axlin16 wrote:
Lomax wrote:
Axlin16 wrote:

Guns N' Roses is Axl Rose, Slash, Izzy Stradlin, Duff McKagan, Steven Adler, Matt Sorum & Dizzy Reed

According to the Rock Hall.

Yes and Madonna is a rock and roll band according to the illustrious Rock N roll Hall of Fame too.

They have no authority. They're not the Hogwarts of Rock Music.
They're a bunch of posers who don't understand that the idea of a hall of fame where people can be included or excluded in rock n roll history goes against everything rock n roll stands for.

Fuck em.


You're making my point for me.


If I say DJ Ashba is the best guitarist ever in Guns... it's just as valid as a member statement as Slash being back.


Thus... no need for the Frank bashing on the board recently.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB