― Robin Carmody, Sunday, 1 April 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Omar, Tuesday, 3 April 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― gareth, Tuesday, 3 April 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― michael dieter, Tuesday, 3 April 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Tom, Tuesday, 3 April 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
Michael, I don't understand your argument. Is it of '50 000 000 Elvis Fans
Can't Be Wrong!' variety? The majority is always right, huh? Not that it even
is a majority.
― Nick, Tuesday, 3 April 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
But I won't use the argument that U2 has millions of followers around
the world, because so do NSYNC and Britney Spears, and we all know
how talented (gag) they are. Instead, think about their 20+ year
career history, and the number of hits they've produced. Whether
someone likes U2's music or not should not be criteria in considering
a group to be a classic. I'm not a Rolling Stones fan, but I have to
admit, they are a classic, whether I like their music or not. U2 is
in the same category- despite personal musical preference, they
supercede personal taste because, in essence, THEY ARE A CLASSIC! You
do not need to be a fan of U2's music to realize that they are a
classic. Besides, how many are involved with Greenpeace, Amnesty
International, etc etc and donate countless hours and money to
causes, such as relieving 3rd world debt? Too many other rock groups
are too high on coke and are too self-involved to partake.
Many of the previous arguments I've read are hardly convincing and
seem petty, "U2 = dud, their music sucks and it's for old people and
like, Bono's a twat and egomaniac...blah blah blah" So what if Bono's
a drama queen? It's all part of the Rock act and makes it more
interesting to the fans and followers (of which, you all know, they
have millions). The group isn't just about Bono, come on, it's the
entire package. U2 is without a doubt, a classic, and an undeniably
― V. MacManus, Monday, 11 June 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― tarden, Monday, 11 June 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
Oh, that's a completely rubbish argument. Why is wrong for people to
consider things on their own terms, and not accept pronouncements
from Rolling Stone, Q et al at face value? I rather like the idea of
people actually thinking for themselves instead of blindly
accepting what they are told.
― Nicole, Monday, 11 June 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
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?
― brah gruplee, Wednesday, 13 June 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― tarden, Thursday, 14 June 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
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).
― Dan Perry, Thursday, 14 June 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Luke, Thursday, 21 June 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
Are you sure you mean this? Though I entirely agree.
― Tom, Thursday, 21 June 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Omar, Thursday, 21 June 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
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
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
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.
― Sam Cunningham, Sunday, 29 July 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
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
― the walrus, Friday, 3 August 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Tom, Friday, 3 August 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Sterling Clover, Friday, 3 August 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Ally, Friday, 3 August 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Dan Perry, Friday, 3 August 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Dave, Tuesday, 2 October 2001 00:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
― chameleon, Saturday, 13 October 2001 00:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
― Emeline Brunet, Friday, 21 December 2001 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
Uh, no. They just *bore* me. Is that so hard to understand?
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 21 December 2001 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
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.
― Tadeusz Suchodolski, Saturday, 22 December 2001 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
― bnw, Saturday, 22 December 2001 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
A very good way of putting it.
― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 22 December 2001 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
― kevin moore, Thursday, 24 January 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
― adam, Saturday, 26 January 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
Your name is not Lestat.
― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 26 January 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
― Mark, Saturday, 26 January 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
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, Friday, 22 February 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
― tav, Friday, 22 February 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
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
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 22 February 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
― Dan Perry, Friday, 22 February 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
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".
― Ronan, Friday, 22 February 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
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
― gareth, Friday, 22 February 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
― Vinnie, Friday, 22 February 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
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).
Edge should have just had them include this Bill Bailey clip in that doco
― shackling the masses with plastic-wrapped snack picks (sic), Sunday, 31 December 2017 18:30 (seven months ago) Permalink
also Rush literally afaik has never jammed or improv'ed ever in concert
― Joan Digimon (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Sunday, 31 December 2017 18:31 (seven months ago) Permalink
GUYS the distinction is "admired by chops-hungry muso types" / "reviled by chops-hungry muso types."
You can quibble all you like about who is included/excluded from each bucket, but it is a recognizable distinction.
― sympathy for the tasmanian devil (Ye Mad Puffin), Sunday, 31 December 2017 18:54 (seven months ago) Permalink
Edge can't play
But hes read all the manuals of the post-playing equipment
This is not even up for argument tbh. He couldn't even figure out the chords for the weight ffs
― remember the lmao (darraghmac), Monday, 1 January 2018 00:56 (seven months ago) Permalink
Quick note here that Bono, in his introduction to Tom Doyle's Billy Mackenzie biography The Glamour Chase, specifically admitted that they tried to rip off the Associates (and that he knew there was no way for him to rip off Billy's singing, a wise assessment). And as Doyle himself says in the book, I think you can pretty clearly hear it on the band's 1980 song "Paperhouse," from their debut The Affectionate Punch -- definitely a proto-Edge guitar break in there:
― Ned Raggett, Monday, 1 January 2018 03:41 (seven months ago) Permalink
(Should add of course that said guitar is played by the other core member of the original band, Alan Rankine.)
so as ILM's likely most loyal U2 fan i feel the need to add my 2 cents about the new album. don't read if you hate them, or me i guess.
like all U2 albums, if you're a U2 fan you're probably going to enjoy it but it feels like only half their work, there are a lot of songs on here that sound very much unlike them. more generic. This one too often feels like the work of other parties in places (recognizing that U2 has worked with other parties before of course but it felt a lot more collaborative in those instances.) though in a few cases on this album it works, the song w/Haim and a couple of the tracks with Andy Barlow from Lamb are nice.
But this is down there with Rattle and Hum and How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb but where the former fell flat on its face sometimes bc of miscalculation and the latter was U2 settling into a very by-the-numbers groove, at least in R&H there were some genuinely outstanding songs and in HTDAAB they nailed a classic U2 sound and there are a couple of genuinely rousing tracks.
(also: after sitting with it for awhile i think Songs of Innocence is the better album and actually winds up in the middle of their discography quality-wise for me. upthread i complained about it but i think it's actually very good and sounds like a very heartfelt U2 album -- similar to No Line on the Horizon, albeit not nearly as great.)
my updated, subjective album rankings:
Achtung BabyThe Joshua Tree ZooropaWarUnforgettablePassengersPopBoyNo Line on the HorizonSongs of InnocenceAll That You Can’t Leave BehindOctoberRattle and Hum/How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb/Songs of Experience
― omar little, Friday, 5 January 2018 17:35 (seven months ago) Permalink
Probably wouldn't quibble with that ranking, even if I might shift a couple of the top ones around. Haven't even bothered with the new one.
― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 5 January 2018 17:57 (seven months ago) Permalink
clicked this What's Going On cover expecting it to be disastrous, to my surprise it is not horrible https://open.spotify.com/track/5CPWcXuqQ2QSXJmc1sT19u
― niels, Friday, 5 January 2018 20:29 (seven months ago) Permalink
WarThe Joshua TreeUnforgettableAchtung BabyNo Line on the HorizonRattle and HumPassengersBoyZooropaOctoberPopSongs of ExperienceSongs of InnocenceAll That You Can’t Leave BehindHow To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb
― reggie (qualmsley), Friday, 5 January 2018 22:08 (seven months ago) Permalink
one of us could win!
― sleeve, Sunday, 7 January 2018 00:51 (seven months ago) Permalink
Just look at these two
― licorice oratorio (baaderonixx), Sunday, 7 January 2018 20:31 (seven months ago) Permalink
Putt on your boots
― failsun ra (Ye Mad Puffin), Sunday, 7 January 2018 20:35 (seven months ago) Permalink
Just-For-Men-Gel of Harlem
― attention vampire (MatthewK), Sunday, 7 January 2018 21:12 (seven months ago) Permalink
where the geeks have no shame
― pee-wee and the power men (bizarro gazzara), Sunday, 7 January 2018 21:14 (seven months ago) Permalink
i still haven't found what i'm looking for, which is my golf ball, so i'll have to take a two stroke penalty
― omar little, Sunday, 7 January 2018 21:19 (seven months ago) Permalink
how long, how long must we play this hole
― failsun ra (Ye Mad Puffin), Sunday, 7 January 2018 22:08 (seven months ago) Permalink
Before and after hairplugs.
― MaresNest, Sunday, 7 January 2018 22:38 (seven months ago) Permalink
Stuck in a sandtrap you can't get out of.
― Whiney Houston (Tom D.), Sunday, 7 January 2018 22:45 (seven months ago) Permalink