.

[GNFNR]

.

[Steel_Angel]

i dont think it matters if peeps dislike new gnr... 

[Mobenrad]

i dont think it matters if peeps dislike new gnr... 

Very much agreed there, Frozen.

[Lara]

I think this is called prejudice.
About the same thing happened when Metallica put out "Load" & "Reload" - most people hated them because they sound completely different than Metalica so far. 
(IMO they are great - if they were debut albums, they would be huge success.)

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Image based since most haven't heard the new music, but seen the pics.

[fif]

"Crash Diet" is an awesome song!!  I think it's the sound more than anything.  Let's face it, some of the newer stuff, especially with Bucket, does not sound like vintage GNR.  I can see a lot of people not liking the new GNR because of that.

[A Private Eye]

Yeh I see what your saying and it's a good point how fickle people are. I have a few friends who are casual fans of the old lineup but think the new lineup is a joke etc, it was quite interesting to see there reaction when I played them The Blues. They seemed very impressed and suddenly eager to hear more material by the new lineup.

I don't really want to bring this up in case it goes off topic but a large part of people not liking the new guys was image, some obviously feel that it's not GNR with just Axl but I think others were less accepting because of the image, one guitarist was playing with a kfc bucket on his head and another looked like a dying Marilyn Manson, it's hardly the bad boy rock n roll band that once ruled the world is it.

On the positive side with BH now gone and Robin from recent photos no longer going with the goth look people might respect the new guys a bit more than they did. We know the music is already good and hopefully with the new tour looking less like a freak show people will be more willing to give the music the chance it deserves ?

[Tomorrows]

You got to admit though, if you were watching the VMAs that year not realising the whole band had new members you would be pretty shocked at the sight of Buckethead and Robin Finck.

I think the music speaks for itself but unfortunately some people don't listen when they see a televised performance. Once the band is getting some radio play things will be different.

[ARC]

You should ask this question when the album is out. Things may be different then. At the moment these 'people' you talk about only have bad quality demo's or live tracks to go on.

[metallex78]

I think a lot of people saw GN'R as a really cool looking rock band with the music to match (myself included), so I think Axl's new music will have to be REALLY good for people to get past the current appearance of the band.

[leesixxrose]

People will get past the image now that fuckit head is out..... the others all look normal enough.....

[nesquick]

I think the 2002 line-up was a shock for a lot of people, lots of people weren't prepared to see such a massive changement, it was brutal, maybe Axl pushed the enveloppe a little bit "too far" for most of people, including his most die-hard fans, you know, a shredder, a goth, in a band that used to be a Classic Rock n' Roll band, wow.... what a difference! it was really "too much"...I just hope in 2006 they will come back a little bit more to the Bluesy Roots of what Rock Music is... you know.... let's not forget the bluesy element....That's what Rock n' Roll is about. It's the base, the soul and the heart of this music.

Without the blues, there is no Rock.

[BLS-Pride]

I think the 2002 line-up was a shoxk for a lot of people, maybe they pushed the enveloppe a little bit "too much" for most of people... I just hope in 2006 they will come back a little bit more to the Bluesy Roots of what Rock Music is... you know....I hope.

Me too. But this isn't the right band for that.

[jimmythegent]

its nothing to do with image or sound

the sound of the new band is fine (different from original Guns, still good), they are all proficient musicians

Its just not right to some of us. Guns n Roses weren't just some run of the mill band that came and went. They were one of the all time greats. So to just replace all these key members who brought something unique to the sound and legend with hired hands, and then continue to claim it is still Guns, is hard for many to accept.

It would be very similar to if Robert Plant hired a guitarist, bass player and drummer and called it Led Zepplin. Or if Paul McCartney hired some guys and called it the Beatles.

Would you accept that?

Anyway, this is an old argument

[FlashFlood]

its not music or image its name

[dave-gnfnr2k]

its nothing to do with image or sound

the sound of the new band is fine (different from original Guns, still good), they are all proficient musicians

Its just not right to some of us. Guns n Roses weren't just some run of the mill band that came and went. They were one of the all time greats. So to just replace all these key members who brought something unique to the sound and legend with hired hands, and then continue to claim it is still Guns, is hard for many to accept.

It would be very similar to if Robert Plant hired a guitarist, bass player and drummer and called it Led Zepplin. Or if Paul McCartney hired some guys and called it the Beatles.

Would you accept that?

Anyway, this is an old argument

Its different because in those other bands the members didnt quit and get replaced by new members, that is what happened in guns n roses. A member left and they were replaced. As for the question, a lot of people hate Axl Rose and no matter how good the songs are some will bash them reguardless.

[jimmythegent]

its nothing to do with image or sound

the sound of the new band is fine (different from original Guns, still good), they are all proficient musicians

Its just not right to some of us. Guns n Roses weren't just some run of the mill band that came and went. They were one of the all time greats. So to just replace all these key members who brought something unique to the sound and legend with hired hands, and then continue to claim it is still Guns, is hard for many to accept.

It would be very similar to if Robert Plant hired a guitarist, bass player and drummer and called it Led Zepplin. Or if Paul McCartney hired some guys and called it the Beatles.

Would you accept that?

Anyway, this is an old argument

Its different because in those other bands the members didnt quit and get replaced by new members, that is what happened in guns n roses. A member left and they were replaced. As for the question, a lot of people hate Axl Rose and no matter how good the songs are some will bash them reguardless.

Its nothing to do with hating Axl, its to do with loving original GNR (Axl included)

As far as band members quitting go, thats always a very dicey excuse if you ask me. Alot of people would argue that they were marginalised to the point of being forced to quit.

For example, if you were working in a job, and a member of your team made your job so difficult through inflexibility, exclusion, communication or made it so unpleasant etc.. that you felt no other option but to quit

Other reasons of course would be shoddy televised performances - case in point VMAS 2002

[TOPGUNner]

Everyone I know who seldom listens to GNR always says to me "Oh, but it's just Axl right. Is the music even any good. They're still around?"

I think the new Guns and Roses should be judged exclusivley on the music alone. I mean, granted, we here are interested in the band, but for those who no longer listen to GNR, hand them a copy of IRS and TWAT and make them listen to it, and lie to them and tell them they are old studio demos from long ago that never made it to the album. 100% sure they'll believe you.

I for one love the new GNR, but see them as being very different from the old GNR. I don't think Slash and company could ever have produced "Better." I could see them doing "The Blues" though

[BLS-Pride]

You're right cause if they were still in the band there would be the dirty blues element still in the band. No matter what some people wont accept GnR with out Slash and company. Plus its cool to hate Axl Rose anyway so you Axl will never win.

[nesquick]

Unfortunately, I think making just good music, or even great music is not enough.
You always need the "X factor" to be more than just a good band. You need this incredible human chemistry and combo between the bandmembers, the magic thing, the old band had it and that's why they became larger than life, but the new band doesn't (even if I like them, I have to recognize the old band had more chemistry all together as "a band").