Original v. Cover: Sympathy For The Devil

[NSL]

Being "one of those people" that shits on almost everything the Stones do, I find it hard to like anything they do. Most of their songs just don't click with me, and even the ones I do like, take a few listenings before I can admit to liking it. Except for this song. First time I ever heard it, I was maybe 10, and refused to believe that was Mick Jagger. I loved the song, but couldn't believe the Stone did it.

The Original:

​

The Cover:

​

I'm a huge GNR fan, and thought this was going to be a lot better than it was. The band does a decent job of covering the music, but Axl is just way off his game here. It wasn't anywhere near the original, and it was tough to listen to for a while, considering that GNR had written some real classics, and then fell down with this.

What are your thoughts?

 

[X]

Honestly I've always thought Guns N Roses had to be about the most overrated band in the history of rock and roll. A few good songs does not make you a legendary band. Most of their material is absolutely dreadfully awful. Their cover here is nothing new in that sense.

Again, anyone who chooses GNR's cover of The Stones...I have to seriously question your mental state. Mick Jagger and Keith Richards have more talent in their pinkie toes than the entire overrated mess that was/is GNR.

 

[Goo Punch]

Can't stand the Stones, so gotta go with GnR. Although the cover isn't anything special.

I was actually hoping it was gonna be one of Laibach's 87 covers here. Laibach>GnR

[youtube]hhkvR9uMyU4[/youtube]

Seriously, how can you not love something that ridiculously over-the-top.