You are not logged in. Please register or login.

#2051 Re: Guns N' Roses » Axl Rose reality show proposed » 967 weeks ago

The interesting thing about the article is that it suggests the show would be leading up to "a limited number of concert dates." Which would, presumably, enable Robin to be in both GN'R and the NIN touring line-up at the same time.

I see Jarmo's trying to debunk it over at HTGTH; good luck on that, this report is far too detailed to be a fake. I reckon the negotiations are very delicate, so management's just adopting a "deny-all" approach until contracts are signed.

#2052 Re: Guns N' Roses » I Feel 2008 Is the Year » 976 weeks ago

polluxlm wrote:
elevendayempire wrote:
Mike wrote:

2012 is also the year Charles Manson will be eligible for parole 16

Also, in the Mayan calendar, the year the world is supposed to end. Are these things connected? tongue

Not the world, history.

My bad, I haven't read The Invisibles for a while now... big_smile

#2053 Re: Guns N' Roses » I Feel 2008 Is the Year » 976 weeks ago

Mike wrote:
BrokenGlassNCigs wrote:

2012 is the year Guns are eligible for induction.

Oh yeah and, I too feel this year is the year CD finally emerges (officially or leaked).

2012 is also the year Charles Manson will be eligible for parole 16

Also, in the Mayan calendar, the year the world is supposed to end. Are these things connected? tongue

#2054 Re: Guns N' Roses » GNRevolution Exclusive! Classic Rock Feb Mag Cover! » 976 weeks ago

Jameslofton wrote:

Axl isn't king of the world. Only thing he can prevent is his own album from being released. People need to realize that the ONLY influence he has is in his circle of sycophants, and even that influence is debatable because they play as much of a role in what goes on as he does.

Twenty articles could come out like this every month and there's nothing anyone could do about it. If they could prevent articles, they would have killed that NYT article in 05 because it was the first real look behind the curtain and it wasn't pretty.

Quite. Axl wouldn't have any legal grounds for blocking publication of that article; it's not libellous, and Axl's representative (Beta) was given a right to respond to the claims made in the article, so they were well aware of its content.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB