You are not logged in. Please register or login.

Mikkamakka
 Rep: 217 

Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview

Mikkamakka wrote:
Handsome B. Wonderful wrote:

It sold three million copies. Period.

With the 1 million copies still in BB's store.

DCK
 Rep: 207 

Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview

DCK wrote:

It sold 3 million. It's a good number. All things considered.

Olorin
 Rep: 268 

Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview

Olorin wrote:

I'd like some more indepth interviews like the ones Brain and Tommy gave, they were really good and interesting, Brains especially. That Del James "interview" was just creepy and completely pointless.
I wanna hear more about the songs and the recording process, plus what the future might hold. I couldnt give a fuck about reunion talk or all the bickering about Slash, its so fucking old.
Some responces from that supposed Q and A would be a nice alternative to proper interviews, its been a while since they asked for them, whats the harm in posting a few responces to some good questions asked about the making of CD?

PaSnow
 Rep: 205 

Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview

PaSnow wrote:

Axl just comes off like a big baby in this. Green Day & Metallica both waited 5 years to put out their album, I'm sure the label was pushing them to finish, getting on their cases.  Yet they both obliged by finishing solid records, pushing it, and not crying foul, blaming the label for it, and going into hibernation.

Geeez, CD just seems worse & worse in retrospect.

PaSnow
 Rep: 205 

Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview

PaSnow wrote:
misterID wrote:

I don't know what the contract status is, but they don't own the publishing on it.  It's under Black Frog. If they drop him Axl still owns it. If rumors are to be believed, than they got paid their investment back from the BB deal.

Neemo wasn't talking about publishing, he was talking about the rights to release the next Axl/GnR album. Since Uni recouped some of their money, they're at a point where they are able to sit & wait, and make Axl wait, until he finally caves.

They would have little reason to drop him. Letting him go to a competitor.

metallex78
 Rep: 194 

Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview

metallex78 wrote:
-D- wrote:

Nikki talks about how The label called them in and basically said fire john Corabi and get back Vince or we will not support anything u do.

Fucking record labels getting involved and fucking things up when a band hits a creative peak... and they refuse to get behind and support it simply because their front man was a different guy 17

That one album with John Corabi showed more creative potential than all of the other Motley Crue albums combined.



I guess you could kinda say the same about CD. Creatively it's all over the map, and probably wouldn't have come out sounding even half like that if it was the original lineup playing.

PaSnow
 Rep: 205 

Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview

PaSnow wrote:

I dunno, I don't think having Vince around would have done anything. I'm not so sure the label was that adamant about getting Vince back. In 1993/94 Cru was so toast, they were at that point an afterthought. Even with Vince that album wouldn't have sold. Nikki may be embellishing that a little, or saying what he wants to hear.

Neemo
 Rep: 485 

Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview

Neemo wrote:

i dunno feelgood was pretty fucking awesome

5 singles

Dr Feelgood - #6 Billboard Hot 100
Kickstart My Heart - #27 Billboard Hot 100
Without You - #8 Billboard Hot 100
Don't Go Away Mad - #19 Billboard Hot 100
Same Ol' Situation - #78 Billboard Hot 100

And the album went #1 Billboard Top 200 and has gone 6x Platinum

then Decade of Decadence had 2 singles

Primal Scream - #63 Billboard Hot 100
Homes Sweet Home '91 - #37 Billboard Hot 100

and the album itself hit #2 on the Billboard Top 200 only behind UYI2 and has gone 2x Platinum

then Vince Left in '92 to say Crue were irrelivant ion the 90's is to say that GnR was irrelivant in the 90's

buzzsaw
 Rep: 423 

Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview

buzzsaw wrote:

I think both were irrelevant after 1994.  I think you could make a case that both are still irrelevant.

faldor
 Rep: 281 

Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview

faldor wrote:
buzzsaw wrote:

I think both were irrelevant after 1994.  I think you could make a case that both are still irrelevant.

Unfortunately, I think that goes without saying right now. Motley is probably a little more relevant with Cruefest, but even still.  Saints of Los Angeles came and went without too much fanfare.  Both bands took too much time off to stay relevant. GNR may have been better off releasing a couple lackluster albums over the years like Metallica did.  At least they would've stayed in the spotlight.  Sometimes quantity is more important than quality.  At least when it come to remaining relevant.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB