Synthetic

and they're set for a reunion with that awfully crappy singer. 40+ year old metal fans will cash in on the nostalgia. 

Guns N Roses are OK. I hate Axl's voice though. Wannabe Mick Jagger without any of the swagger or awesomeness that made Jagger DA MAN 

Luckily my sister has NO INTEREST in seeing GNR now. Well also because she saw them back in their prime when she was 17. Motley Crue was more worth it IMO for older metal fans to relive the youth and that goes farther back then GNR.

I will say this, Gnr did "click" as a band. Kinda like Nirvana. Both had weak lead singers.

Yeah they clicked at first. I always say that GNR lived off the success of that one debut album, cause everything else was a disappointment trying to re-capture the magic of Appetite for Destruction. As time has went on too, Appetite hasn't aged that well. Or maybe it's just me, after hearing the 3 main hits over and over on radio for years. 

I always believed that GNR came out at the "right time" as well. As of 1987, most of the hard rock bands flat out sucked in the last leg of the glam rock era. GNR had a sound that was heavy, but not too heavy. If they were just a notch heavier, they would have been a metal band, easily. But they had the sound just right and the whole sex and drugs shock factor thing going for them, that's become stereotypical rock image. Image really helped them a great deal.