The American Smiths

Guns n Roses sound nothing like The Smiths, they look nothing like The Smiths, the lyrics are not even comparable (Morrissey being great, Axl being slightly less than great or even passable) and they appealed to different types of people. Plus one was a stadium rock outfit who were in it for the money the drugs and the groupies. One was an indie group that changed people's lives and changed the course of British music.

Now do you understand? The two have nothing in common. And I repeat: they didn't even sound alike. AND whether you like it or not, The Smiths are still seen as great, brilliant etc, Gunsn Roses are seen as crap, a joke band etc.

So the two have even left different legacies.

If you still like Guns n Roses in the year 2002 you must be American in which case aren't you better off attending Counting Crows concerts and nuking third world countries or building McDonald's in developing nations than debating this thread?

Q.: How the hell does that get a degree let alone become accepted for a masters?

A.: Evidently she goes to the UK, and applies for the same masters program as you.

"I will say this as well - The Manics are not best suited to be compared to Guns n Roses either. A far better band that changed lives and kicked ass on stage."

But That Bloke Out Of Manic Street Preachers admitted himself that he wanted his band to be a mix of Guns 'N' Roses and Public Enemy!!

No.

P.S. Yes you're right - the Manics did actually want to be a UK Guns n Roses/ Public Enemy. They were far too good to be the former in my humble opinion.

P.P.S Funny yank story no.987 - I switched on Brass Eye one night and was killing myself laughing when one of the Americans got up and left, having neither laughed nor been offended. 'You know I don't think I get this type of humour' she said in her vacant Texan growl.

I think that having read the thread there seems to be far more of a connection than I would've thought abt before but I have never given much thought to Guns and roses (its just time and place, I guess).

Both bands are something you grow out of but you'll always remember the happy memories they gave you. In terms of sound it's different and the same. I definetely get the stones' comparison to both and lyrically they did appeal to adolescents, just like every other band who had some degree of success. Guns n'Roses are surely more in the minds of other bands because they were huge. The smiths had a few chart hits in the UK but were a cult following.

Nirvana's seuccess of course, is due to the use of the power chord. they were a heavy metal band with diff. lyrical themes (though maybe not so far from the Roses). grunge is what you get when you splice punk w/heavy metal.

Its amazing to think Calum has a degree. He is acting like some bad comedian out of the 1970s (Bernard Manning comes to mind). No wonder Mark E Smith hates students. Like nabisco, i thought he must have been 13 or so. It boggles the mind.

''Sorry, everyone for acting embarrassingly like Julio and even bothering to engage over this one.''

Oh, come off it Nabisco...the way ILM is constructed, you can get into arguments that just snowball. You have argued at quite a lenght too and so have quite a few on the Sleeper thread. But yes, it is time to stop and get back into more constructive, thought-provoking discussions.

On the website Smith & Wesson, I could find only superficial similarites.
1. Controversial lyrics: not uncommon (great for publicity as well)
Now if they had controversial lyrics for the *same* reason,then
I would've been more impressed. But as it is, Moz's controversial lyrics are not nearly as controversial as "faggots, niggers, hating immigrants" of GNR's.
2. Bands featuring "one-named" members. Common as well.
3. Neither singers used their real name. Typically it's the singer who is "one-named" in which case obviously he would not be using his real name. Name-changing is quite common.
4. Both lead guitarists are from the UK, and neither used their real name. Here we go with the name thing again. Is it that big of a deal to mention it 3 times? It is interesting that both were from the UK however..
5. Members of both bands declare their supremacy. Quite common as well.

In the end, these parallels don't really stand out much.

The only major parallels I see between the two are the following:
1. Both GNR and The Smiths served to creating a huge buzz in their respective music worlds with continued fascination to this day.
2. Both bands seemed to have arrived at a musically dreary period and helped rejuvenate the music scene.
3. Both bands thrived on controversy.
4. Axel on quest for

the strokes' first impressions of earth = what "guns 'n' roses as the american version of the smiths" really sounds like? use your illusion I + strangeways?

(I still stand by my Weezer comparison as being apt for late nineties/early this decade time. Now, not so much.)

Bright Eyes is a much better place to start. But unforunately there is no American version of the Smiths. There couldn't be.

Plus one was a stadium rock outfit who were in it for the money the drugs and the groupies.

And some members of the Smiths weren't?

i am not american, and i am still horny over the september reelease date for chinese democracy

-- Queen I am neither Buffy nor the Messiah G (effexxo...) (webmail), June 29th, 2002 2:00 AM.

So axl ended up being less racist than morrissey

has morrissey ever came out with anything as bad "one in a million"? i mean he's obv a racist but come on.

Bengali in Platforms is probably an obvious one.

I think bengali is kinda worse in a way

haha previous ilm discussion of "bengali in platforms" is sort of weird

It's more smug and paternal and super condescending

And because axl is so emotional and scattershot and troubled than moz, I'm more inclined to believe he was channeling his ugly feelings from when he first moved to l.a., where miz again and again has said out of line shit and always seems really calculating and manipulative in how he presents it