Classic or Dud: U2

I can't hardly stand early U2 (whiny, monotonous, overblown), but everything from Joshua Tree on I find to be real groovy. Even Rattle & Hum. Achtung Baby is a great classic. The first side of Joshua Tree is flawless. Am I crazy?

Early U2 is quite clearly the bomb. The first three albums are glorious in their entirety. After that, they tend to be a mixed affair (the sole exception being _Achtung, Baby_ which is pretty much brilliant except for one song which is so dull that I can no longer recall its name or tune).

Are you sure you mean this? Though I entirely agree.

Look guys, U2 is a powerful band. They inspire extreme hatred in some people, but they inspire extreme love in far more. Regardless of how much Bono offends you (I'm still unclear as to how that can happen... he's quite harmless) the facts still stand: U2 is one of most artistically and commercially successful bands of all time.

Many of you mantain that they were good in the 80's but sold out in the 90's. I suggest looking up the word "irony" in the dictionary. During their ZooTV and PopMart stadium tours they flat out refused corporate sponsorship (unlike the Rolling $tones) and lost money as a result. Just as you wouldn't assume that a battered old book is of poor literary quality based on its cover, you shouldn't attribute shallowness to a band just because they have video screens and flashy lights.

And if U2 were a dud band, why would they go out of their way time after time after time to change their musical style, often against what is currently popular. 'War' was a big success, so why go do 'The Unforgettable'? If 'The Joshua Tree' made them the most popular thing to come out of Ireland since the potato, why do something like 'Rattle and Hum'? And if their earnest, save-the-whales style of the 80's worked so well, why in God's name would you go off with something like 'Achtung Baby' and ZooTV? And why then change into 'Pop'? Why?

Because they've got balls. U2 just keeps changing and growing, usually with success (UF, JT, Achtung) but sometimes getting burned (Rattle and Hum, Pop). Instead of choosing the quick and easy path by just repeating a familiar sound over and over, U2 never let the critics, the media, or any of you punks drag them down.

Because like the Beatles and the other established classic bands, U2's twenty-year career has been a continuous growth process. U2 just keeps evolving, so they ALWAYS HAVE SOMETHING NEW AND INTERESTING TO SAY.

And THAT is the critical component in seperating the wheat from the chaff. THAT is what makes U2 a classic, and THAT is what makes the Rolling $tones a dud.

Amen.

classic in the sense that they came out with a few good pop songs and records

dud in the fact that they are absolute crap now, are absoulute hypocrites and sellouts (the abc documentry sponsored by McDonalds, ticket prices only the rich can afford, bono dissing the "violence" by anti-capitolist protestors in Genoa whilst he was on a luxury yacht with tony blair without one mention of that protestor who was shot twice in the head, etc), were influenced by punk and yet at the same time sneered at the genre, along with the fact that bono's ego is larger than the size of the american continent and believes that the world revolves around him

i also think they ripped off depeche mode-badly-when they came out with achtung baby, only a few good songs on that record, and pop was much, much worse

i no longer buy u2 albums anymore, not even used

Uh, no. They just *bore* me. Is that so hard to understand?

If so, dud.

If not so -- liked them well enough when I was a teenager. Thought Rattle and Hum (a/k/a Boring and Dumb) was the aural equivalent of a clump of pubic hair in the shower. Originally hated "The Fly," and thought Bono's Fly-schtick was stupid, but came to like Achtung Baby well enough. Stopped caring not soon thereafter. Like the fact that Bono speaks up for Jubilee and Amnesty International, but since when does being a do-gooder necessarily = being a good music-maker?

Verdict: classic, but barely.

A very good way of putting it.

Your name is not Lestat.

Well I guess you buy more than one album a year since "_Achtung Baby_ deserves death", U2 just bore you and "This _Rattle and Hum_ album is pretty shit, one or two tracks aside". Just curious, I wonder what kind of music has your favour and what albums you didn't drown in your acid remarks this year.

Emeline Brunet.

Last year? Lateralus, Exciter, Group Sounds, The Blueprint, Ended Up a Stranger, Amnesiac, How I Loved You (and the Michael Gira solo) for starters, I could go on if you wanted me to. Point is, I love *that* and find U2 objectionable -- and I really don't care what you think. If you're a U2 fan in turn, you shouldn't be caring what I think. ;-)

I also love that guy at the top who said they experimented with electronica on 3 of their albums. you can't buy comedy that good. Don't you love when bands don't actually "experiment with electronica" but they say that they did and then all their fans are like "HEY THIS E-L-E-CTRONICA STUFF IS VERY GOOD".

I was so not a fan of that song when it came out. It's been years since I've heard it, so maybe time has dulled the pain -- though I suspect not.

I will gladly weather any ridicule people want to toss my way for liking "Stuck In A Moment..." because it's a great song (even if the video is somewhat trance-inducing in a bad way).

MY POINT.

Vinnie: "Walk On" is a decent song; certainly it has a better chorus than "Elevation", but loses out in the end because, well, the tune is hella-weak. Maybe it's just the singer in me, but there was a very memorable moment last week when I was at a pizza place with some singing friends and when "Stuck In A Moment..." came on, we all joined in on the chorus simultaneously and without prompting. It was then that I realized how catchy that chorus is.

Remember, the difference in vowels in our name indicates that there will always be some minor points of conflict.

And a last thing : "If you're a U2 fan in turn, you shouldn't be caring what I think. ;-)"

Well I do love U2 but I care what you think : I'm not upset that you can't stand them, I just like the way you shoot them down, simple and sarcastic but still... funny. I guess I'm a fan who appreciates interesting remarks, even if there are sometimes a bit harsh.

The prospect of the whole band. As it happens, I rather think that Achtung Baby reflects U2 listening to Violator instead of the other way around! ;-)

Well I do love U2 but I care what you think : I'm not upset that you can't stand them, I just like the way you shoot them down, simple and sarcastic but still... funny. I guess I'm a fan who appreciates interesting remarks, even if there are sometimes a bit harsh.

Ah, that's quite all right, then! I'm crabbier than I seem, I think, and I like people who stick to their guns but allow for debate anyway. :-)

It literally singlehandedly killed my fandom as such, and by the time they came back I was much more interested in the bands and musicians they were aiming to emulate. A pretty hard break, really.

I was still onboard for Achtung Baby but I remember how the vinyl version of Rattle and Hum my sister bought remained in pristine condition (and has up until the present day) because after 1-2 listens we were like "nah, this sucks"

it moves in mysterious ways!

It’s still the only pre-Songs of (x) era album they haven’t reissued.

and i think is possibly the biggest-selling album in history that hasn't been properly remastered/deluxed, as in if you're going to the shop to buy it you're buying the tinny 1988 version.

i think it's partly because paramount own the film (a remaster programme of just the album alone wouldn't make much sense) but more because they ignore the ones they're iffy about (excusing the straight vinyl reissue here and there, zooropa and pop never had proper reissues either; the former was reduced to a bonus disc in the massive achtung box in 2011).

even Passengers just received a vv nice RSD reissue on LP

Hawkmoon never did anything for me and hate God Pt 2 but the other studio tracks are sound solid entertainment. I have a soft spot for Angel of Harlem.

"Songs of Innocence" is the first U2 album with no song titles I recognize, and if I ever gave it a listen I can't remember. I think I did? And I don't even recall hating it, just feeling no need to come back to it. "Pop," I know everything from that record, like a lot of it, don't like some of it, only dislike one or two tracks. "Rattle and Hum" (looks at track list) I know pretty much everything on it, don't really mind the singles one way or another but appreciate some of the deep cuts. I did see the movie in the theater, though, and even bought a souvenir poster in the lobby afterward.

Having done a listen to the new EPs this morning, I feel confident in saying that the Easter Lily EP is better and generally features their best music in a vv long time. Days of Ash has a couple songs which are just as good, though it falls short elsewhere. I think it's nice to hear the Edge bringing his classic guitar sound back to the fore once again, after it mostly vanished into the churn of their last couple albums, and was only intermittently featured on NLOTH. I hope someone told him no one wants to hear his attempts at recreating the Vertigo sound over and over. The very beginning of Resurrection Song even sounds akin to mid '80s ambient Edge.