Share your thoughts on Chinese Democracy

[Dan H.]

Hey all

I'm working on a documentary short for class, and I've decided to have it revolve around the Chinese Democracy release and aftermath, and GN'R in general.

For part of the segment that I'm working on right now, I'm going to dive into the internet fan base of GN'R, namely during the 'dark ages' and post during the record release. (axl chats).

I'd love to add some anecdotes or points of reference from the internet fan base, so if anyone has any stories or interesting thoughts related to Chinese Democracy, I'd love for you to share them with me in this thread, and I may use them in the documentary, or contact you for elaboration or an interview.

 

 

Thanks guys!

[Jwalker19]

I think it gets a really bad rap by most of the general public, but I genuinely do think the album is very good and highly underrated. It's obviously NOTHING like the old band, but that doesn't make it bad. I would just mention that a good majority of diehards love the album, but it is vastly disliked by the rest of the world due to the huge difference in music compared to the old band, the long ass wait, and the money spent on it.

[liers]

It didn't live up to the public's expectations. It was the most expensive album ever made and took 14 years to release. The hype was so huge that it couldn't possibly live up to expectations. Without Slash and Duff many people we're uninterested. On top of that many musicians who helped write the songs we're long gone and had there parts re recorded multiple times which IMO led to a lack of emotion in their playing.

That said, I like the album. The demo versions of many of the songs we're MUCH MUCH better IMO (like the blues and IRS)  but it's still a solid album.

[maynard]

Some good ideas buried in a pretentious mess.

[Tom-Ass]

Until that album came out I didn't think it was possible for Axl to release bad music and boy was I wrong.. At times it is like listening to someone scratch their fingernails down a chalkboard. It was an experimental album that just ended up sounding copy and pasted,  in cohesive and all over the pace. It is a damn shame that it was released under the Guns N' Roses name because it really tarnished their short but near perfect catalog of music.

[Dan H.]

Just now, maynard said:

Some good ideas buried in a pretentious mess.

Why do you feel like 'pretentious' is the right word to describe Chi-Dem? I'd expect to hear that as a descriptor of indie music, or whatever 10/10 Pitchfork album of the week is. Maybe Axl had the ambition of pretentiousness, but even that I don't see a lot of evidence of. Overproduction and grandiosity don't neccisarily equate to pretentiousness, ya know?

 

I've heard that word tossed around a lot in regards to Chinese Democracy, but is pretentiousness REALLY the quality that caused the album to fall short? You're a more well known poster on the forum and I take your thoughts seriously, so if you could elaborate a little on why you find the album to be pretentious, I'd appreciate it.

 

I think that maybe Axl wanted the album to be a little artsy and pretentious, but I'm not really convinced by the album itself that the goal was to create something groundbreaking and avant garde. Compared to other albums that DO have pretentious and avant guarde acclaim around them, Chinese Democracy doesn't really have similar artistic ambitions. I think the only album I'd be willing to accept as pretentious at the time, that replicates some of the thematic and grand production of Chi Dem, is Kanye West's My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy which is an overproduced mess, but redeems itself with coherency, and a brutal arrogance and confidence that allowed it to pummel through mainstream expectations. I think the key difference is that the concept of Chi-Dem was never very confident, given how long it took to release especially.

The album itself gained attention, hype, and a rabid close knit fan base, but fell flat on its face in the public, and I think that it's probably because the album says a whole lot, but none of what it says is particularly interesting, especially given the VERY VERY interesting circumstances and hype surrounding it. It is an album of 'Yeah that was pretty good' songs, but no concept, no goal, no ambition. Just 14 songs that have a lot of personality(good or bad), but no ambition or purpose.

[Italian girl]

good songs, but too "patinated",  if you understand what I mean..

[Silent Jay]

 

http://images.eonline.com/static/news/pdf/axlrose.pdf

[Caught_in_a_Coma]

Mostly good/great songs with some awesome songs and a few that are hard to understand why they were placed on it.  The history behind it weighs it down

Edited March 21, 2016 by Caught_in_a_Coma

[Juventino]

Should have come out seven or eight years earlier. Decent album, but not worth the wait and money it cost.

[Dan H.]

14 minutes ago, Silent Jay said:

 

http://images.eonline.com/static/news/pdf/axlrose.pdf

THANK YOU.

 

Links like this, with verified factual sources(publications that are known to be reliable, or PDF's of legal documents or contracts) or hard legal documents get bonus appreciation points from me! (Saves me a lot of effort looking for this shit)

 

For those of you who feel that the album is a masterpiece, or is great (I'd say a very very causual definition for this sentimate would be anyone rating the album a 8/10 or higher on a subjective 10/10 scale apply) yet fell short for external reasons, I'd like to dig into the theory more in the documentary, and would appreciate details that led you to that conclusion.

Edited March 21, 2016 by Dan H.

[Gibson87]

I think that it took so long to release mainly because Axl had total control over everything involving the band. He wanted to make the perfect record no matter how long it took and he was able to do that because the whole band after 1997 was all hired hands that had no say (Even Dizzy). The record didn't live up to expectations because it had the legacy of the old lineup overshadowing it. That said, I like CD a lot. I was kind of hesitant at first because it was a different sound but it's one of those albums that grows on you. 

[DIST]

Chinese Democracy offends me.

[Silent Jay]

19 minutes ago, Dan H. said:

THANK YOU.

 

Links like this, with verified factual sources(publications that are known to be reliable, or PDF's of legal documents or contracts) or hard legal documents get bonus appreciation points from me! (Saves me a lot of effort looking for this shit)

 

For those of you who feel that the album is a masterpiece, or is great (I'd say a very very causual definition for this sentimate would be anyone rating the album a 8/10 or higher on a subjective 10/10 scale apply) yet fell short for external reasons, I'd like to dig into the theory more in the documentary, and would appreciate details that led you to that conclusion.

same copy but slightly different

http://www.khpslaw.com/pdf-Cross-Complaint-filed-5_17_2010.PDF

[estranged_85]

Very underrated album IMO. a bit to overproduced but very good.

[sonofnazareth]

'There Was A Time', is the only reason why I still have a physical copy of the album. 

[axlslash]

The songs are great, in my opinion, albeit overproduced. It certainly has its peaks and valleys, but I don't get the general hate. Could it meet the lofty expectations? No. Might it have stayed more legendary if it had stayed a myth rather than ever see the light of day? Without a doubt. But I love a lot of the songs, they make great live setpieces, and have been overly criticized by people who deluded themselves into thinking that it would be AFD 2.

[Sprite]

13 minutes ago, Dan H. said:

THANK YOU.

 

Links like this, with verified factual sources(publications that are known to be reliable, or PDF's of legal documents or contracts) or hard legal documents get bonus appreciation points from me! (Saves me a lot of effort looking for this shit)

 

For those of you who feel that the album is a masterpiece, or is great (I'd say a very very causual definition for this sentimate would be anyone rating the album a 8/10 or higher on a subjective 10/10 scale apply) yet fell short for external reasons, I'd like to dig into the theory more in the documentary, and would appreciate details that led you to that conclusion.

I just like the music. I don't make any quips about it being the greatest or I don't care what the build up was. The music is what's important to me. I grew to love GNR in the early 2000s and got pretty attached to the "new band", while still maintaining a lot of love and respect for the old band. Guns to me is like a piecemeal project and it always sort of has been aside from Appetite and Lies. 

I know many want that cohesive "5/6 members only" band, but the way I see it I don't care who is playing it as long as it's good. I like Buckethead, Stinson and Bumblefoot a lot individually, so that just added more to it for me. But I don't necessarily need the "image" of a band to like the music. Seems like most do and most complaints about it are rooted in image or sound. Sound complaints to me just prove you can't please everyone. Staying stale and taking the ACDC route is a career choice. Evolving is another. 

I also really like the mystique aspect of it and probably attach some sentiment to it, much like many do for the AFD era today. I remember waiting outside Best Buy and being surprised there were other people there. I remember that Axl display they had when you first walked in. I remember all the leaks and the excitement on here. I remember those first snippets of "IRS". To later generation fans such as myself, this is my "ritz 88". 

So I don't really get involved in what anyone thinks of it. I think when you get down to it, it's a bunch of incredibly talented musicians who made a record with one of the most badass singers in history. Release it as a solo album and maybe it'd be better received. I also don't think it did bad at all Debuted at #3, sold at least a couple million (I stay out of this argument), and was well received based on some reviews I read. 

This is an interesting read about the pre CD release era:

http://www.gnrevolution.com/viewtopic.php?id=12376

 

[Billsfan]

I think it's an underrated album. I really don't think it was promoted as much as it should have been, with neither axl or the record company really cooperating the way they probably should have. I also think it's tough to really promote and accept a GNR album without slash duff and maybe Izzy on it from both a marketing and fans POV.

Having guys like duff at your side might have helped deal with an Irving azoff/management disagreement. 

[ZoSoRose]

Personally, I love CD. Better, Maddy, Catcher, Shacklers, Prostitute, and Twat are some of my favorite GnR songs

[Silent Jay]

Just now, Silent Jay said:

ame copy but slightly different

http://www.khpslaw.com/pdf-Cross-Complaint-filed-5_17_2010.PDF

Slash said this in 2010 concerning the lawsuit against Azoff " Speaking to VH1 Radio Networks' Dave Basner, Slash stated about Rose's countersuit, "I don't even know what that's about. I don't know where Axl is coming from. I mean, I know where Irving is coming from — he's looking for commissions for a tour that he booked. [It's a] pretty reasonable kind of thing. Axl's countersuing, so I'm not sure exactly what the merit is that he's countersuing, exactly. Anyways, I don't keep up with that, I don't follow it."

 

In 2011, lawsuits were settled to the mutual satisfaction of the parties.

http://noisecreep.com/axl-rose-and-irving-azoff-settle-lawsuit/

 

Then in 2012, Axl sued Activision for 20 milion

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/axl-rose-guitar-hero-lawsuit-361946

 

But failed.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/axl-rose-loses-20m-lawsuit-417262

[hellobeatle]

44 minutes ago, Silent Jay said:

 

http://images.eonline.com/static/news/pdf/axlrose.pdf

To answer OP- I don't think the album is any worse than any other members solo albums or VR output.  There's some good and some bad.  I'd say a solid 6/10.  I prefer good hooks and melodies that defined 87-91's output.

Interesting to note in the counterclaim quoted above that Slash, Duff, etc are labeled "original" members.  Stated as a party admission in a legal filing - sorry Ole, Rob & Tracii...

[batman007]

We have had tons of these topics , and I never get tired of them. I for one , love CD! My favorite GNR song is better. I have seen Guns 12 times, and look forward to hearing anything from Chinese. Axl did take forever to release  it , and maybe shouldn't of messed with the songs 100 times. I don't mind the guitar over the guitar . Some say it sounds like a mess. Sounds fine to me. And if that's what Axl wanted, that's what he wanted . I like the mixture of the whole album. I respect anyone's opinion. If they say it's garbage, so be it. The thing I hate ,some of the forum members "thinking ", that if I think it's a brilliant album, I'm stupid . ??. To me it is a brilliant album. Something I have enjoyed since 2008. And love the lyrics. If I ever bumped into Axl, I know I would thank him for Chinese. It's 2016 and some things in my life right now , are at its lowest. And I have songs like Better, SOD, and TIL to help ease the pain.

[action]

it actually made me like UYI II like worse.

to me it's obvious CD wanted to be the spiritual successor to UYI II. you have songs like madagascar which have the same theme as estranged "so far out of the shore" vs "the waves they get so high". there are even quotes from MLK who also featured on civil war.

but UYI II was sincere. somehow i can't say the same about CD. CD sounds anything but sincere. it sounds plastic, soulless, lifeless, desperate even.

some of the demos i've heard actually were better than what was offered eventually: catcher in the rhye had a brilliant guitar track by brian may. it was replaced with a generic solo by whats-his-face. IRS sounded badass, it ended up sounding like justin bieber music.

CD is too hollywood (despite GNR being a band from hollywood), too las vegas, too broadway.

if the world is elevator music, generic hollywood blockbuster music (which it was, it featured on the movie body of lies"). UYI II also had a movie song but that movie happened to be terminator 2 which must be one of the best all time action movies ever. if the world will hardly be remembered as featuring on a classic movie.

there were a handfull of forced hard rock songs with cringeworthy examples like "scraped". talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel (hardy har-har) but mostly the album was a ballad album.

i wish the album never happened. the only reason keeping me from selling it is a historical one. i've never waited more for an album in my life.

Edited March 21, 2016 by action

[Dan H.]

So I'm still hearing a lot about the album being good or great, yet suffered from the events surrounding the release. So I need a little bit of elaboration NOT defending the album's enjoyability(that's subjective as fuck, and I applaud and support anyone who finds any kind of pleasure and personal connection to the album. Obviously in taking on this task, I also have a strong intrapersonal connection to the record, but I want to try and eliminate those factors, and get to the bottom of why the record wasn't as successful as, for example, AFD. 

 

I'm sure it's easy to argue that rock isn't as mainstream, nor is GN'R, but there are quite a few rock bands (rock bands that lack the legacy of old GN'R) that have had huge critical and financial success, with or without similar hardcore fanbase hype.

 

So maybe these questions would be important:

 

Did you enjoy Chinese Democracy?

Did it personally affect your life? How so? Any stories? (I.E. when Chinese Democracy was released I went with a friend to Best Buy as soon as it opened, and we sat in the parking lot in his car and listened to the whole thing. I've never had so much of a personal connection to a record release to the point that I would do something like that, and it's a memory of a love of music and the music industry that I will always remember)

Do you think its place in music history is deserved or not? Critical reviews of the album are generally average to above average, would you say that the album deserves a legacy similar to other widely critically acclaimed albums like Dark Side of the Moon or similary recognized and famous/infamous album attempts?

 

Perhaps the circumstances surrounding the album are more interesting and accessible than the music itself? Do you think the album and its history, rather than being a detraction of the album, was the bulk of what made Chinese Democracy interesting?

 

I'm VERY VERY VERY skeptical(boarderline dismissive) of the concept that if the album was released earlier, it would have been more well received, I see no evidence that it would have done any better at holding as firm a legacy as AFD, regardless of the time that it was released. I'd love some more thoughtful elaboration on why people here think that the year that it was released makes any substantial difference to how well the music was received.