Taking Sides: ACHTUNG BABY by U2 VS. MONSTER by R.E.M

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (184 of them)
This thread makes a really interesting read.

I just got Achtung Baby a few months ago, after many many years of generally dismissing U2 (although I always liked "Discotheque" and one or two other things). It's rapidly become one of my favorite listens, to the point where I fear I may have to give it the victory here, and I'm speaking as a longtime apologist for Monster. The comparison between the two unfortunately brings the flaws of REM's record into focus. What makes AB so good is that U2 brings a strong set of songs to a slight but significant tweak in their sound; REM seems to hope that a totally different sound will write the songs for them. Monster has many good songs spiced throughout, but a lot of times Buck is just leaning on the tremolo pedal and betting that something cool will happen. (One suspects that they needed to do a big tour to let material grow more organically - New Adventures In Hi-Fi, pretty much written and recorded on the Monster tour blows Zooropa out of the water, and can take Achtung in a fair fight.)

Achtung's production, for the most part, is a thickened-up (sometimes spaced-out) modernized version of U2 circa "Gloria," nearly completely bypassing the obnoxious Joshua Tree crap that put me off of them for so long.

It's got its downfalls - there's a sameyness to several tracks, to where you wonder if it's necessary to have "The Fly" AND "Until The End of the World" AND "Acrobat" on the same album ("Until The End of the World" clearly wins the category). But the dizzy disco ripple of "Even Better Than The Real Thing," the punchy gospel of "Mysterious Ways," and the wide-open lament of "So Cruel" - these are some fucking excellent songs! Monster for its part has, again, some great tracks, but most of them are working the same sonic territory (with the exception of "Tongue" and "Strange Currencies") making it feel much more like some sort of genre exercise than a major statement.

As for the posturing involved, miccio pretty much nails it with "You want to punch Bono in the sunglasses, you want REM to just take the damn things off and stop kidding themselves."

Eventually I'll probably overdose on Achtung and not want to hear it for ages, at which point they'll probably be about equal as things I pull out every once in a while and go "Hey, this is a lot better than I remember!"

Doctor Casino (Doctor Casino), Saturday, 28 October 2006 19:27 (nineteen years ago)

Oh, and I should mention, I bought Achtung pretty much because of this thread! (Well, that, and it was like $2 for the LP, can't argue with that.) Bravo ILM!

Doctor Casino (Doctor Casino), Saturday, 28 October 2006 19:29 (nineteen years ago)

both were definitely deluded into thinking irony was the answer to their self-consciousness re: messianic arena posturing.
-- manthony m1cc1o (anthonyisrigh...) (webmail), October 23rd, 2004 7:06 PM.

More overuse of the word "irony." I don't see how R.E.M. deciding to do more of a rock album after Out of Time and Automatic for the People was in the least ironic.

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Saturday, 28 October 2006 19:43 (nineteen years ago)

I think, as with U2, a lot of the "irony" cues come from presentation. This is the period when REM started to get really glammy, right? Definitely some sort of pastiche going on there, plus you have campy things like the falsetto a-go-go of "Tongue" and the combination of grungey menace with a corny reference to telephone codes with "Star 69," etc. I could see where the irony train picks up.

Doctor Casino (Doctor Casino), Saturday, 28 October 2006 19:56 (nineteen years ago)

I don't know how ironic all that stuff is in the first place, but could point out that the album before it had "Hey kids, rock and roll" on it and the album before that had "Shiny Happy People" on it, etc. Anyway, point being that I don't think Monster is a paradigmatically ironic record.

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Saturday, 28 October 2006 20:03 (nineteen years ago)

Perhaps the irony angle is something cooked up by the fans as a cover story for the cheesiness of it all?

http://rem.sk/news/monster.jpg

I used to have a poster of this, in black and white. REM - tough kids from the mean streets of Athens, GA??? It's just so out of touch with their previous "image" that one wants to read it as some sort of literate, deliberate posture rather than a sincere sell...

Doctor Casino (Doctor Casino), Saturday, 28 October 2006 20:11 (nineteen years ago)

Reinventions aside,
REM>U2
but
Achtung Baby>Monster

M. V. (M.V.), Saturday, 28 October 2006 20:14 (nineteen years ago)

Love'em both, but Achtung's got the edge.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Saturday, 28 October 2006 20:34 (nineteen years ago)

ha casino - i halfguessed you revived this!

j blount (papa la bas), Saturday, 28 October 2006 21:51 (nineteen years ago)

probably reposting something i've said already above but achtung for me (criticising it for sameyness in comparison to monster seems a bit much), love them both though ('the fly's alot more disco than 'ebttrt' btw). r.e.m. glam move totally sincere i have no doubt - stipe's a huge roxy music and t. rex fan and obv him and buck both like new york dolls (hence: they formed a band).

j blount (papa la bas), Saturday, 28 October 2006 21:56 (nineteen years ago)

judging by the number of albums i see in the budget bin at the cd store, people liked (i.e., were less likely to sell back) achtung baby. they always have like 12+ copies of monster.

max (maxreax), Saturday, 28 October 2006 22:10 (nineteen years ago)

The Fly may or may not be more disco, but it's a lot less good IMO. I can get behind Bono a lot more when he's going for some sort of Flood-fried cool than when he gets into that flanged whispery crap and tries to sound actually profound. "A man may rise, a man may fall..." ugh...might as well be the shitty Johnny Cash song.

Doctor Casino (Doctor Casino), Saturday, 28 October 2006 22:32 (nineteen years ago)

they always have like 12+ copies of monster.

. . . and a couple hundred more in the back.!

Stephen Bush (Stephen B.), Saturday, 28 October 2006 22:33 (nineteen years ago)

ts: monster vs. to bring you my love

the orchid and the wasp (Jody Beth Rosen), Saturday, 28 October 2006 22:51 (nineteen years ago)

The Fly may or may not be more disco, but it's a lot less good IMO. I can get behind Bono a lot more when he's going for some sort of Flood-fried cool than when he gets into that flanged whispery crap and tries to sound actually profound. "A man may rise, a man may fall..." ugh...might as well be the shitty Johnny Cash song

That's my favorite part of the song! It's one of those stupid ideas executed brilliantly, with diminishing returns, as the years went on.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Saturday, 28 October 2006 22:52 (nineteen years ago)

Also: The Edge's solo in "The Fly" might be my favorite.

An even better thread idea might be to compare the albums' first singles: "The Fly" vs "What's the Frequency, Kenneth?" At the time I was less prepared for the U2 song.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Saturday, 28 October 2006 22:53 (nineteen years ago)

"Kenneth" slays "The Fly." In fact, if you pull just the ringers from each album, I have a feeling Monster would just about win out song-for-song, with a few draws thrown in. It's the mid-grade material on Achtung that stands tall over the similarly-situated stuff on Monster. (That is: "Tryin' To Throw Your Arms Around The World" beats "King of Comedy" no contest.)

Doctor Casino (Doctor Casino), Saturday, 28 October 2006 23:25 (nineteen years ago)

Slurred, distorted sex-jive vs slurred, distorted messianism.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Saturday, 28 October 2006 23:32 (nineteen years ago)

Achtung's ringers: "Who's Gonna Ride...?", "Acrobat."

Monster's ringers: "You," "Circus Envy," "Bang and Blame."

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Saturday, 28 October 2006 23:34 (nineteen years ago)

The Fly may or may not be more disco, but it's a lot less good IMO. I can get behind Bono a lot more when he's going for some sort of Flood-fried cool than when he gets into that flanged whispery crap and tries to sound actually profound. "A man may rise, a man may fall..." ugh...might as well be the shitty Johnny Cash song.
-- Doctor Casino (agode...), October 28th, 2006 4:32 PM.

Prediction: There will come a day when "The Fly" is your favorite song on Achtung Baby. This is what happens.

hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Sunday, 29 October 2006 01:07 (nineteen years ago)

they always have like 12+ copies of monster.
. . . and a couple hundred more in the back.!

i like the idea of r.e.m. fans across the country returning en masse a week after monster came out to sell their no-longer-wanted copies

max (maxreax), Sunday, 29 October 2006 01:08 (nineteen years ago)

in fact, that alone kind of makes me like monster more; it must have been perceived as a much greater break from previous albums than achtung baby was (regardless of how much of a break it actually was, whatever that might mean)...

max (maxreax), Sunday, 29 October 2006 01:09 (nineteen years ago)

But let's not forget that a break from previous albums was the best thing that could have happened to U2 coming off of Rattle & Hum, at which point they had taken the Enoiscana thing as far as they could and had to change or die.

Whereas REM was coming off their Joshua Tree.

hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Sunday, 29 October 2006 01:15 (nineteen years ago)

Enoiscana

this broke my brain.

the orchid and the wasp (Jody Beth Rosen), Sunday, 29 October 2006 01:20 (nineteen years ago)

you have to wonder too if u2 fans (if such a body besides "the general american/european public" exists) are, in the end, more tolerant of change than r.e.m. fans. but i think you're right, it's hard to follow up an album like automatic for the people without alienating people, whereas w/ rattle and hum you'd do a hard job not to bring ppl back to the fold.

max (maxreax), Sunday, 29 October 2006 01:29 (nineteen years ago)

i think the irony bits are completely overstated for both albums and both bands. whatever poses they struck in photos or rolling stone covers or live shows, the albums in their "ironic" periods are completely sincere affairs.

gear (gear), Sunday, 29 October 2006 01:52 (nineteen years ago)

But let's not forget that a break from previous albums was the best thing that could have happened to U2 coming off of Rattle & Hum, at which point they had taken the Enoiscana thing as far as they could and had to change or die.

This kind of leads in the direction of ultimately giving REM more long-term credit, insofar as, even though their albums have gotten less and less consistent, they've steadfastly refused to do a "they've returned to their classic sound!" record - even going so far as to release "Bad Day" just to prove that they could still do it if they wanted to. Whereas, after Pop, U2 seemed to realize they had taken the whole ironic, Euro, dancey, electronicafied, whatever thing, as far as they could...and then couldn't think of anything else so they just went for what they knew wouldn't fail to sell records on Beautiful Day or whatever it was called.

As for whether or not it was an "ironic" period, I'll grant that for REM it's a lot more debateable, but, seriously, PopMart?

Doctor Casino (Doctor Casino), Sunday, 29 October 2006 03:20 (nineteen years ago)

This kind of leads in the direction of ultimately giving REM more long-term credit, insofar as, even though their albums have gotten less and less consistent, they've steadfastly refused to do a "they've returned to their classic sound!" record - even going so far as to release "Bad Day" just to prove that they could still do it if they wanted to. Whereas, after Pop, U2 seemed to realize they had taken the whole ironic, Euro, dancey, electronicafied, whatever thing, as far as they could...and then couldn't think of anything else so they just went for what they knew wouldn't fail to sell records on Beautiful Day or whatever it was called.

Best Album Since Blood On The Tracks

hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Sunday, 29 October 2006 03:31 (nineteen years ago)

Categories that both "U2" and "R.E.M." belong to:

-Bands that became popular in the 1980s

-Bands consisting only of white men

-Bands whose names lack lowercase letters

-Bands whose newest record is consistently "hailed as their best since the last one mattered"

-Bands whose entire discography is owned by my dad

-Bands who I listened to a lot in junior high

-Bands whose music features guitars and drums and a bass and vocals, either in concert or separately

-Bands who have been on the cover of Time magazine

max (maxreax), Sunday, 29 October 2006 03:41 (nineteen years ago)

this is an interesting thread for me because i rate rem WAAAAYYYYY higher than u2 looking at their whole catalogs but Achtung and especially the next one (zooropa?) revived my interest in u2 after having completely written them off. credit mostly to eno and edge's guitar. as for rem, i think monster is when i finally checked out after being a huge fan of their early work, losing interest after the 3rd album, and having a revival with Out Of Time & Automatic. there isn't a single song off Monster that i care to hear ever again, What's the Frequency Kenneth is one of the worst singles in rem's up & down career.

totally off-topic, but i remeber seeing a feelies/rem show at the Felt Forum (lol, what a great name for a concert venue, amirite?) circa 1987. feelies didn't make much of an impression, rem were pretty good, but i had started to lose interest at that point (the Superman album) and then stipe did an ultra-diva pose late in the concert when some teens up front were pushing close to the stage - they walked off and never came back!! i guess they thought it was too dangerous/possibility of someone being crushed or something, but it easily could have been handled by security. that really ended the rem phase of my youth

timmy tannin (pompous), Sunday, 29 October 2006 03:51 (nineteen years ago)

even though their albums have gotten less and less consistent

Always seems important to register dissent re. this position. : D

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Sunday, 29 October 2006 03:59 (nineteen years ago)

This is like putting "Revolver" up against "Dirty Work".

Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Monday, 30 October 2006 14:03 (nineteen years ago)

Two bands approaching the same sound from different directions.

I wouldn't say Depeche Mode were approaching this sound by "Violator". "Songs Of Faith And Devotion" was very obviously an attempt to sound like "Achtung Baby" era U2, but "Violator" is more of a classic "dark" electropop album, which has also been the case with all of their post SOFAD-efforts.

Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Monday, 30 October 2006 14:05 (nineteen years ago)

in answer to the question posed, achtung baby.

monster for me is listenable, but fairly forgettable. it doesn't have a great deal of consistency or even a particular standout track (ok, maybe 'crush with eyeliner') to make me reflect on it when it's not playing. i've tried to revisit it a couple of times, but never seem to get more than a minimal kick out of it.

achtung baby is a strange record for me. it really does seem to be built around a few very good songs ('mysterious ways', 'one', 'acrobat', 'the fly') while the rest are either interesting ('love is blindness') or completely expendable ('so cruel', 'trying to throw your arms around the world'). the whole thing sounds great, and when the better tracks merge with the slick production, the record truly shines. really, a bizarre instance of an album where i treasure the highlights and tend to overlook the impact of the weaker tracks, perhaps because they're largely inoffensive and unmemorable. somehow it remains relatively untarnished and a landmark of early 90s rock.

Charlie Howard (the sphinx), Monday, 30 October 2006 15:10 (nineteen years ago)

I'm still waiting for R.E.M. to go through a "let's go to Berlin and record" phase.

Elvis Telecom (Chris Barrus), Monday, 30 October 2006 18:24 (nineteen years ago)

This kind of leads in the direction of ultimately giving REM more long-term credit, insofar as, even though their albums have gotten less and less consistent, they've steadfastly refused to do a "they've returned to their classic sound!" record - even going so far as to release "Bad Day" just to prove that they could still do it if they wanted to. Whereas, after Pop, U2 seemed to realize they had taken the whole ironic, Euro, dancey, electronicafied, whatever thing, as far as they could...and then couldn't think of anything else so they just went for what they knew wouldn't fail to sell records on Beautiful Day or whatever it was called.

This is OTM in every way. Add "Imitation Of Life" to "Bad Day", though. One of the great "eighties" R.E.M. songs.

David A. (Davant), Monday, 30 October 2006 20:41 (nineteen years ago)

And if R.E.M. roamed into areas they never expected to, nor were equipped for, at least they didn't sit on their laurels. The common wisdom is that they should have called it a day after Berry left, but I can't help admiring their stubborn refusal to cry uncle. And, although patchy and sporadic, they did write some good stuff after the brilliant NAIHF that I'm glad we got to hear. U2, by contrast, have been pretty consistently dire after Pop.

(Ha, Just noticed the coincidence with the titles: "Beautiful Day" and "Bad Day" both being attempted -- and successful -- returns to form.)

David A. (Davant), Monday, 30 October 2006 20:47 (nineteen years ago)

after Pop?

hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Monday, 30 October 2006 20:55 (nineteen years ago)

You know, I debated that one with my inside voice, because there are parts of Pop I like, whereas there is very little on the last two I could say that about ("Beautiful Day", maybe "Vertigo" and I have this weird thing for "In a Little While"), but if you prefer to say "after Zooropa" I wouldn't be upset.

David A. (Davant), Monday, 30 October 2006 21:00 (nineteen years ago)

The last two U2 albums are both great, because they are leaving behind the somewhat failed experimentation that was "Pop".

And - and this is important - the last two U2 records are not returns to their 80s style. The U2 of the 80s were a mainly riff-based rock band, with The Edge's guitar playing the obvious centrepiece of everything, while the U2 of the oughties is more of a melodic pop band, heavily influenced by the classic songwriting style of the Britpop bands.
I obviously prefer the latter, which is why the last two U2 albums have been my favourite albums by then ever.

Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Monday, 30 October 2006 22:39 (nineteen years ago)

but if you prefer to say "after Zooropa" I wouldn't be upset

I'm a Zooropa guy. Though I believe gear (obv. not Geir) will occasionally post in defense of Pop.

Geir, I agree that the last two records are not "returns to form," and I even think They've got some of Teh Edge's coolest playing, but what you're overlooking is that they're also boring and irrelevant. They're like the greatest Remy Zero records ever.

hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 00:48 (nineteen years ago)

the last two albums are totally old pro rock music, U2 on autopilot. they're good enough, i suppose. the records almost exist to be played in a live setting. 'how to dismantle an atomic bomb' in particular came off a lot better in concert than it did on on record. 'pop' was the reverse. i think it's a really good album. bono's best lyrics, etc etc i've said it before.

gear (gear), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 00:51 (nineteen years ago)

There is no such thing as "irrelevant" music. Music is timeless, good music works regardless of age or "relevance".

Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 09:50 (nineteen years ago)

"Pop" was a faillure - a failed attempt to do something that U2 aren't supposed to do. "Staring At The Sun" was a great song though, pointing forwards towards the Britpop-influenced style of their next two albums.

Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Tuesday, 31 October 2006 10:26 (nineteen years ago)

Any thoughts on this?

blackmail (blackmail.is.my.life), Thursday, 9 November 2006 14:39 (nineteen years ago)

i was listening to MONSTER again last night
and YOU and STAR 69 are STILL CLASSIC.

pisces (piscesx), Thursday, 9 November 2006 14:52 (nineteen years ago)

"Pop" was a faillure - a failed attempt to do something that U2 aren't supposed to do.

http://cache.kotaku.com/gaming/bono_takes_two.jpg

"...and y'know, I also think we need to sort out the environment because people are affected by that too and...what's this?... Alright, then, Geir has told me that I'm not supposed to talk about the environment. Just stick to poverty, yeah."

"By the way, did anyone buy that song we did with Green Day?... You did? Fookin' suckers!"

wordy rappaport (EstieButtez1), Thursday, 9 November 2006 14:59 (nineteen years ago)

Editor!

"in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, for which their music was often used as an inspirational backdrop."

hearditonthexico (rogermexico), Thursday, 9 November 2006 15:40 (nineteen years ago)

atta had 'zooropa' on his headphones

gear (gear), Thursday, 9 November 2006 18:58 (nineteen years ago)

one year passes...

while the U2 of the oughties is more of a melodic pop band, heavily influenced by the classic songwriting style of the Britpop bands "Acrobat" by U2

Doctor Casino, Sunday, 12 October 2008 14:39 (seventeen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.