Tuesday, July 06, 2004

Behind the Music: GNR

Last night I watched quite possibly the worst Behind the Music I have ever seen. I don't watch the show religiously, but I have caught a number of them. Usually they are interesting as they chronicle the early years, the descent into snorting Scarface-sized piles of cocaine, and the inevitable comeback at the end of the show.

Behind the Music: Guns and Roses had virtually none of this, which is a head-scratcher when you consider that at least the coke-buffet would have applied.

The neon-flashing signal that this BTM was going to be bad was the fact that they couldn't even dredge up half the original band. I mean, no one expects Axl to come out of the looneybin, but at least you could dig up the rest of the guys. Nope, all they got to interview was Slash and Steven Addler. For the later years they added Matt Sorum and Gilby Clarke. Given that Steven Addler was crazy strung-out after about 1987 (and looked to be for the interviews too), and by the time Matt Sorum and Gilby Clarke got involved things had already started to implode, the only person providing much of a first hand account was Slash. Throw in the fact that Slash was stupid-drunk..well...all the time, he didn't have as much to add as someone who can actually recall anything from 1988-1994.

The other disappointing thing was that practically immediately they jumped right into everyone being in GNR and being scumbags. There was no "Indiana Farmboys seduced by the evil Holywood temptations", no "We stole Tracii Gun's band name and then kicked him to the curb", nothing.

Finally, towards the end of show when you expect the 'new album coming out in a week/comeback reunion tour/arrested for heroin possession after supposedly being sober' type of thing all they had was Axl's ~10 show canceled tour failure with a completely new lineup and Velvet Revolver. Admittedly Velvet Revolver's album has been doing well, and Scott Weiland hasn't tried to escape from court-ordered rehab lately, but for a wrap-up it was a bit less then satisfying.

No comments: