Support NeoGAF

[Leon]

With Johnny Depp on the cover.

Here's a list of all the main stories and interviews, one by one :

- An article about Dominic Monaghan, the least important of the LOTR elves.
- A 3-page insight on Bush reinstating the draft.
- The in-depth cover story on Johnny Depp.
- The story of Joe Clarke, a "snitch in the gov's war on drugs"
- And last, but certainly, certainly not least, a 6-page catastrophe about whales. Whales.

I always knew Rolling Stone tends to deviate from the music a little sometimes...but try as I may, I still sat on the crapper, bored out of my mind, I couldn't believe that I was holding a Rolling Stone. Then I slowly realized that for the first time ever, I have no desire to read even a single page of an entire magazine that I bought.

I mean, whales.....

 

[demi]

And people called me lame for buying game magazines.

 

[Leon]

I'll kick you

 

[demi]

AT LEAST MY ARTICLES ARE WORTH READING

 

[ToxicAdam]

Didn't RS have a format change a few years ago? Where they weren't so story heavy, and had more "blurbs" (ala Blender)?


Anyways, how you described RS .. is how I always remembered it. Sometimes the issue would be awesome ... but most of the time it is exactly how you described it.

The only reason to ever read a RS (10 years ago) was for a Peter Travers movie review .. or a PJ O'Rourke column ... and once a year, they would have a good article on a relevent rock group .. or an expose on drug running or something.

 

[distantmantra]

My girlfriend's parents got me a two-year subscription to Rolling Stone for Christmas, so far I've received two issues and they haven't been too bad.

The one prior to the Depp cover had a nice article on Bright Eyes, plus an interesting take on the social security debacle by a Harvard Economist.

 

[human5892]

You can't possibly buy a RS and expect significant music coverage (although your article summary leaves out their usual music news, album reviews, etc.). It's not what the magazine is for.